Business Constituency (³BC²) qualified support for release of geo-names in .HONDA, .AXA, .EPSON, .HSBC, .XYZ and .COLLEGE

[Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The Business Constituency (“BC”) appreciates the opportunity to provide 
comments regarding the proposed amendments to the .HONDA, .AXA, .EPSON, .HSBC, 
.XYZ and .COLLEGE registry agreements submitted through the Registry Services 
Evaluation Policy (“RSEP”) on 08-Feb-2015, 08-Feb-2015, 08-Feb-2015, 
27-Feb-2015, and 06-Mar-2015 respectively, and posted for public comment on 
31-Mar-2015 at 
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/ctn-release-tlds-2015-03-31-en

The .HONDA, .AXA, .EPSON, and .HSBC Requests

In their respective RSEP requests, Registry Operators Honda Motor Co., Ltd., 
AXA SA, Seiko Epson Corporation, and HSBC Holdings PLC seek the release of all 
country and territory names, as defined in Section 4 of Specification 5 of the 
Registry Agreement, at all levels of the .HONDA, .AXA, .EPSON, and .HSBC TLDs.  
The BC fully supports these requests submitted by .BRAND registries.


The BC has consistently supported the release of country and territory names at 
all levels in .BRAND TLDs; this comment aligns with those prior comments.  See 
Business Constituency, Comment on Neustar's Proposal for Country and Territory 
Names<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-ctn-release-neustar-19sep14/pdfjYdQmbpklt.pdf>
 (Nov. 8, 2014); Business Constituency, Comment on the Release of Country and 
Territory Names in the .BMW and .MINI 
TLDs<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-bmw-mini-amendment-11dec14/msg00001.html>
 (Jan. 24, 2015); Business Constituency Comment on Release of Country and 
Territory Names for the .EMERCK, .BERLIN, and .HAMBURG 
TLDs<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-emerck-hamburg-berlin-amendment-02mar15/>
 (April 1, 2015).

As set forth in our previous comments supporting similar RSEP requests, the BC 
believes that the use of country and territory names will allow .BRAND 
registries to create customized and relevant localized content for consumers in 
various countries and regions across the world, especially in developing 
nations with predominantly non-English-speaking populations.  This geographic 
segmentation will not only bring greater efficacy to .BRAND TLDs, but it will 
benefit businesses and consumers alike by fueling economic development in 
regions which currently have limited choice with respect to linguistically and 
culturally tailored domain names and content.

In addition, we firmly believe that the release of country and territory names 
for .BRAND TLDs will enhance security and trust in online commerce by 
permitting businesses to exercise more control over the security and stability 
of their customized web sites.

The BC considers that use of country and territory names within a .BRAND 
registry will always avoid confusion with an official government web property.  
Indeed, the very basis of the .BRAND TLD model is for the brand to serve a 
unique source identifying function at the top-level, and for geographic names 
to serve a purely descriptive function at the second level.

Given the context of the underlying commercial sites, consumers directed to 
country.brand domain names will always be aware that they are engaging with a 
geographically-targeted version of a company’s official web site as opposed to 
a government property.

The BC also notes the historical availability of country and territory names at 
all levels in all legacy TLDs.  .BRAND TLDs should be afforded the same 
opportunity to allocate such names, given that the risk of abuse or confusion 
by the use of such names in a .BRAND registry is low.

The .XYZ and .COLLEGE Requests

In its RSEP request, Registry Operator XYZ.COM LLC seeks the release of all 
country and territory names, as defined in Section 4 of Specification 5 of the 
Registry Agreement, at all levels of the .XYZ and .COLLEGE TLDs.

The .XYZ and .COLLEGE requests are distinct from the RSEP requests previously 
supported by the BC because they relate to open TLDs, as opposed to .BRAND TLDs 
or geographic TLDs.  In our view, the historical availability of country and 
territory names at all levels in all legacy TLDs still argues for a presumptive 
approval of the request for the release of country and territory names.

However, the BC recognizes that the geographic segmentation and non-confusion 
arguments set forth above are less persuasive for open TLDs than for .BRANDs or 
geographic TLDs.  We therefore believe that the presumption of approval should 
more readily be overcome by a particular government’s objection to the release 
of its country or territory name.

In contrast, for .BRAND TLDs, the BC strongly believes that the presumption of 
approval should only be able to be rebutted upon a showing of a justified and 
well-supported objection that convincingly demonstrates probable harm and/or 
confusion due to the use of its country or territory name at the second level.

Given the above rationale, to the BC the central question is one of degree, 
where restricted-access TLDs (such as .BRANDS and geographic TLDs) should enjoy 
the strongest presumption of approval (rebutted only upon justified and 
well-supported governmental objections), whereas open TLDs should enjoy a 
lesser presumption of approval (rebutted upon a governmental objection).

In the future, in order to make the requested delineation more clear, the BC 
would support bifurcating similar public comment periods on country and 
territory names into buckets corresponding to restricted access TLDs, such as 
.Brands or geographic TLDs, versus open TLDs.


These comments were drafted by Andy Abrams and approved in accordance with our 
charter.


Steve DelBianco
Vice chair for policy coordination
ICANN Business Constituency