Execute GAC Advice before Contention Resolution
Dear Sirs, please find attached a proposal that we developed together with some other community-based applicants to show how the GAC Advice process can be harmonized with the New gTLD Application Process. The proposal basically asks to execute the GAC Advice before any contention resolution occurs. Otherwise an applicant might succeed in the contention set who will be thrown out because of GAC Advice later in the process. This timing would not make sense and would potentially create a .XXX like legal situation. Background: The GAC Advice process should take into account the process and timing of the whole New gTLD Application Process. The process following the execution of GAC Advice has to be finished before the Contention Resolution Process is being initiated. Otherwise an applicant who is willing to provide the safeguards being asked for in the GAC Advice may have been eliminated in the process (e.g. by an auction), while the winner of the Contention Resolution is an applicant who is not willing to abide by the GAC Advice. A TLD could then not be awarded at all although a suitable candidate was in place, making the GAC Advice meaningless. *** GAC Advice Response may become Story Telling *** Our fear is that many applicants are likely to respond to the GAC Advice in a manner that is like story telling: Based on a mixture of fiction garnished with some facts from their applications, applicants will write savvy responses with only one aim to calm down the GACs concerns and survive the GAC Advice storm. The duck and cover strategy. Background: According to the Applicant Guidebook, material changes to applications need to go through a Change Request process. In contention sets Change Requests that are advantageous to a specific applicant are not likely to pass due to competitors opposition. Even in non-contentious cases Change Requests may not pass, as they could be anti-competitive. Also, the permanent opportunity for applicants in contention sets to amend their applications (by PICs, Change Requests or by the response to a GAC Advice) raises serious anti-competitive questions, as there is very limited space to make changes to an application according to the Applicant Guidebook. Proposed solution: No fiction only facts! Applicants who have not been able to determine privacy issues, consumer protection issues or other issues associated with their TLD application over 12 months after filing their application raise serious concerns whether they are the appropriate entity to operate a TLD. *** GAC and ICANN Board should accept the responsibilities they asked for *** Our fear is that close to no decisions will be made to reject applications that are included in the GAC Advice. It is to be expected that only a handful of applications, where there is overwhelming support for a rejection (such as those in IV 1. In the Beijing Communiqué), will actually be rejected. This might happen due to legal and liability issues or simply lack of a clear-cut process Background: Governments demanded instruments namely GAC Early Warning and GAC Advice to prevent applications they were unhappy with. Now the GAC filed an Advice for more than 500 applications, asking for more security, more accountability and more appropriate operation of regulated industries TLDs, among other issues. According to the Applicant Guidebook, the consequence of not fulfilling the GAC Advice (without the option to distort the application to an noncredible extent) would be a dismissal of the gTLD. Unfortunately, the current GAC Advice process poses loopholes for all parties involved which offer the chance not to be responsible for this dismissal but instead not make any decision at all. This could be the next occasion where ICANN does not serve the Public Interest and the Community but those that play hardball in this application process by their lobbying and financial power. Proposed solution: GAC and ICANN Board should accept the responsibilities they asked for! Kind regards, Dirk Krischenowski CEO TLDDOT GmbH (.GmbH Top-Level-Domain) Akazienstraße 2 10823 Berlin Tel: +49 30 49782354 Fax: +49 30 49782356 Mobile: +49 173 2339156 <mailto:krischenowski@xxxxxxxxxx> krischenowski@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.dotgmbh.de> www.dotgmbh.de Registergericht: Handelsregister am Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRA 124498 B; Geschäftsführer: Dirk Krischenowski; Steuernummer 30/035/03469 Attachment:
gac-advice-procedure.pdf |