ALAC: Advice to the ICANN Board on Subsequent Procedures (R-11A)
| Date Issued | Document | Reference ID | Current Phase |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALAC: Advice to the ICANN Board on Subsequent Procedures (R-11A) | AL-ALAC-ST-0421-02-01-EN (R-11A) | Phase 2 | Understand |
DESCRIPTION
Despite the welcomed retention of much of the 2012 AGB implementation relating to Geographic Name at the Top Level (and their adoption as new consensus policy in place of the much less favourable ones in the GNSO 2007 Consensus Policy), the ALAC remains concerned over the insufficient support within the community for the need to respect and take into consideration the voice of stakeholders to future applications for strings matching many names with geographical meaning.
DEPENDENCIES
Progress pending the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Final Report.
STATUS UPDATES
| Date | Phase | Type | Status Updates |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 2 | Phase Update | As noted at the joint Board-ALAC session at ICANN75, the Board greatly appreciates the ALAC's responses to the Board's questions. The Board continues to review and consider the ALAC advice, to determine whether, in addition to informing the Board’s deliberations, there are actionable items that may require Board action before (or after) the Board takes action on the SubPro policy recommendations. The Board anticipates that this exercise will be completed in the first half of 2023 and that a response to the advice would come at the time of action on the SubPro Final Report – or shortly thereafter. |
| Phase 2 | AP Feedback | The events arising from the application for “.AMAZON” suggest the problematic nature of existing policy with respect to strings with geographical meaning. We reiterate that ICANN must respect local laws which sought to provide rights and/or priority to applicable names of places, or even grant protection for such names as a duty for relevant public bodies/authorities to uphold. Examples of such applicable local laws that have been brought to our attention are: (i) Switzerland’s Art. 29 of the Civil Code (CC); (ii) Germany’s Art. 12 of the Civil Code (BGB); and (iii) France’s France: Art. L45-2 of the post and electronic communication Act (Code des postes et des communications électroniques) and art. L.711-4 of the Intellectual Property Code (code de la propriété intellectuelle). We have been made to understand these laws clearly apply in the DNS space, and although the reported cases mostly apply to second level domain name registrations, we see no reason why motivations of these laws would not apply to TLDs also. We also reiterate that ICANN should respect the interests of local communities/actors to strings that match place names or names with geographical meaning in their location, beyond simply recognizing international trademark laws as the defining basis for determining priority over such strings. Most significantly we are concerned that strings matching the names of large, populous non-capital cities (for eg, Shanghai) are not subject to a stronger preventive protection of requiring letters of support/non-objection from relevant local governmental/public authorities irrespective of the applicant’s declared use of the TLD. Ultimately, we should be amenable to preventing unintended consequences of an application for large non-capital city name strings from being snapped up simply because we assume that the relevant local governmental/public authorities (especially those that aren’t well versed with ICANN) are aware that they had the opportunity to object. In this respect, requiring the applicant to approach relevant local governmental/public authorities is more reasonable than placing the burden squarely on the relevant governmental/public authorities to be aware of and to object to applications for such name strings. |
| Phase 2 | Clarifying Question | The Board notes the complexities surrounding the legal definition of geographic names, as evidenced by the application for .AMAZON. Can the ALAC provide any additional insight into defining a geographic name, e.g., from legal or case studies? |
| Phase 2 | Phase Change | Now Phase 2 |
| Phase 1 | Phase Update | Acknowledgment sent to ALAC |
