FINAL DRAFT STATEMENT

Please click here to download a copy of the final draft below.

End of Draft Statement

(PRIOR STATEMENTS // OBSOLETED IN FAVOUR OF FINAL DRAFT STATEMENT

SECOND DRAFT

The ALAC is very concerned with the apparent lack of action related to the URS. The URS has been described as one of the mechanisms that will provide TM owners with adequate protection within the context of the new gTLDs. ICANN has stated that potential URS providers believe that the current version of the URS is not implementable at the required costs and ICANN has budgeted $175k to address this issue with the work to be carried out by a bottom-up community effort. To date, neither the GNSO nor the ALAC have been invited to participate. The ALAC advises the Board to take immediate action to ensure that ICANN is seen as moving forward with the URS and that the URS is available as planned by the launch of the first new gTLD.

FIRST DRAFT

At the gTLD-WG meeting on Aug. 27th, I suggested that the gTLD-WG might want to endorse a statement for ALAC consideration concerning the apparent lack of action related to the URS. The issue is that potential providers have said it is not implementable at the planned price, and the price was one of its key characteristics.

ICANN has budgeted $175k for a bottom-up community-driven process to address the problem, but to date there has been no movement. SInce the URS is billed as one of the key processes to protect TM holders in the new gTLD world, such inaction is problematic.

The actual wording of the budget item is:

24. Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) – $175K

Implementation work conducted on the URS to date indicates that the implementation will not attain the cost target of $300$500 in URS fee per case. This is based on discussions with WIPO staff, direct communication with the IPC, and examples understood from the ICM registry and Nominet. Because the fee target is a primary goal of the URS, additional work and study should be undertaken to determine if amendments to the program might attain the fee goal and retain the safeguards and other features of the program. This study must be undertaken by a community group. New work will commence with a working session in the Prague ICANN meeting. While the scope of the effort is not yet defined, it is necessary to reserve resources for the work in the ICANN's FY13 budget. This is the placeholder for those resources while the best way to accomplish the work can be designed. The work will be done through a bottom-up, community discussion similar to the work done to create and review the URS in the first instance. It is fully intended the URS be implemented in time for the introduction of new gTLDs.

The statement drafted during the meeting was: The ALAC is very concerned with the absolute lack of action related to the URS. The URS has been described as one of the mechanism the will provide TM owners with adequate protection within the context of the new gTLDs. ICANN has stated that potential URS providers have stated that the current version of the URS is not implementable and ICANN has budgeted to address this issue, but to date no action is apparent. The ALAC advises the Board to take immediate action to ensure that ICANN is seen as moving forward with the URS.

I have revised it to echo the wording of the budget proposal.