ARI Registry Services Public Comment – Implementing Rights Protection Mechanisms in the Name Collision Mitigation Framework

[Yasmin Omer <Yasmin.Omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ARI Registry Services Public Comment – Implementing Rights Protection 
Mechanisms in the Name Collision Mitigation Framework
ARI Registry Services welcomes the opportunity to provide the following 
comments on the paper titled ‘Implementing Rights Protection Mechanisms in the 
Name Collision Mitigation Framework’.

Support of the “Status Quo”
ARI Registry Services vehemently supports the existing approach for names that 
are released from the SLD Block List referred to in the paper as the “Status 
Quo”. Specifically, that names that were not previously made available for 
allocation are subject to the Trademark Claims service on release. ARI Registry 
Services notes that the desire to subject any previously reserved domain name 
that is later released from reservation to the Sunrise Services has already 
been raised by certain members of the community during the public comment 
period on the Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements. This suggestion was 
discussed by the community and following careful analysis, ultimately rejected. 
In rejecting this suggestion ICANN in the Report of Public Comments for the 
Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements dated 30 September 2013 stated that:

‘The desire to subject any previously reserved domain name that is later 
released from reservation to the Sunrise Services is understandable, but it is 
not practical to implement. If a Registry Operator releases a previously 
reserved domain name prior to the start date of the Claims period, the released 
domain name will be treated subject to the requirements of any applicable 
registration period under the TMCH Requirements. If, however, a Registry 
Operator releases a previously reserved domain name after the start date of the 
Claims Period, the released domain name must be subject to an individualized 90 
day Claims Period from the date of release (so long as the Trademark 
Clearinghouse is operational).This provides a minimum level of protection for 
the rights holders regardless of when the domain name is released.’

ARI Registry Services does not believe that names reserved as a result of the 
SLD Block List are warranted any special consideration over and above any other 
reserved names insofar as the requirements in question are concerned. To that 
end, a SLD Block List name, at its release, should be treated no differently to 
any other reserved name. The reservation of names on the SLD Block List does 
not present a significantly new set of circumstances incapable of being 
addressed by the current requirements. Any attempt to, once again, modify 
Rights Protection Mechanisms already agreed to by the community is not 
warranted particularly when many Registry Operators have already invested 
significant time and money implementing processes in accordance with the 
current requirements and there is yet to be presented any evidence of real, as 
opposed to perceived, negative consequences of such.
Further to the above, any changes this late in the process will introduce 
significant effort for all parties involved. These efforts will undoubtedly 
result in costs that will ultimately be borne by the registrants. For example, 
if we are forced to rework our systems to support a late stage sunrise, those 
names would be priced significantly higher than normal to ensure that we are 
able to recover the costs of such implementations – something we are sure 
rights holders have not taken into account. These efforts will also result in 
significant delays in releasing names that have already been tied up far longer 
than they should have been.

ARI Registry Services remains deeply concerned and frustrated by what appears 
to be yet another attempt by certain sectors of the community to re-open old 
issues regardless of the consequences. This is a pattern of behaviour that 
appears to be supported by ICANN by allowing these unfounded debates regarding 
previously closed operational requirements to continue. Ultimately, this 
compromises any level of operational predictability for Registry Operators and 
results in unnecessary expenditures. It also continues to undermine any notion 
of levelling the playing field between existing and new TLD operators. ARI 
Registry Services requests that ICANN break this pattern by maintaining the 
Status Quo and thereby demonstrating that ICANN can provide Registry Operators 
with the operational predictability they deserve and that the community expects 
of them.



Regards,

[Description: Description: Description: ARI Logo]YASMIN OMER
Compliance & Policy Manager

ARI REGISTRY SERVICES
Melbourne | Los Angeles
P  +61 3 9866 3710
E  yasmin.omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:yasmin.omer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
W  www.ariservices.com<http://www.ariservices.com/>

Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/ARIservices>

The information contained in this communication is intended for the named 
recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged 
and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must 
not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have 
received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system 
and notify us immediately.