<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
EOI Comments
- To: draft-eoi-model@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: EOI Comments
- From: Jon Nevett <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:19:54 -0800
In November, I urged ICANN not to adopt an EOI process --
http://forum.icann.org/lists/eoi-new-gtlds/msg00060.html. I posited that the
only way to introduce a fair and effective process would be to make it
mandatory, engage in a public outreach effort, and finalize the key rules.
Once ICANN engages in the outreach effort and finalizes the rules, I argued
that it might as well move forward with accepting full applications instead of
incurring the delays that would be caused by a bifurcated application process.
While I still agree with my November position, I do, however, agree with the
staff recommended form of the EOI. In other words, if we are going to have an
EOI process, the staff recommendations seem to me to be the best implementation
of such a process. An EOI that isn't mandatory or doesn't provides some
benefit to the applicant would be worthless. Too many applicants wouldn't
participate. The fee must be high enough to avoid speculation and only be
refundable in extreme circumstances. There must be a communications campaign
to ensure that the public is aware of the process. The rules must be final or
as close to final as possible before the EOI or pre-applications are accepted.
I also agree that the applied-for strings should be made public, but that
objections to specific strings should not be made during the EOI process.
Rather, those concerns should be raised during the formal objection process.
By publishing the names, however, the community would have more time to work on
preparing such objections and applicants could begin discussions to try to
resolve potential string contentions. The publication of the EOI names should
not be used by the community to derail New TLDs because of a few potentially
objectionable applications. If so, New TLD critics actually could apply for
problematic strings in a clandestine manner with a goal of derailing the
process. Contact information for each string should be made public. Any other
information collected should not be made public, as it could be used for
anti-competitive means. I would envision that ICANN would publish the EOI
application information in a similar fashion to the 2000 TLD application
information (see
http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm).
In terms of a timeline, we need to start the communications period as soon as
possible -- absolutely before the Nairobi meeting. That period is the long
pole in the tent and should start right away. We should announce that ICANN
will take pre-applicaions sometime in late July and the final rules for such
pre-applications will be announced no fewer than 30 days prior to ICANN the
application deadline. We do not need the rules finalized prior to announcing a
pre-application window. In the United States, there are public outreach
campaigns about voting on election day on a certain date in November. These
occur well before the candidates in such elections are finalized. We should do
the same with EOIs.
If we accept EOI applications in late July, that would leave the community the
next 6 months to discuss, finalize, and implement any changes based the few
outstanding issues. Any issue that isn't outstanding as of Nairobi, should be
absolutely final. Without a deadline, we will continue to talk about the
process with no end in sight. The folks who are being paid to delay New TLDs
will continue to offer procedural roadblock after roadblock. We should have a
Draft Applicant Guidebook v.4 ready for Board approval at the Brussels meeting
and then accept EOI applications 30 days or so thereafter. After the EOIs are
accepted, we could look at the number of applications, make any necessary minor
tweaks to the root scaling process, and begin accepting final applications in
4Q10. There is no reason to wait until after the December meeting to issue the
Final Applicant Guidebook. We have been working on this for far too long and
ICANN has been losing too much credibility with slipped deadlines to build in
another 5 month delay (August-December) unless it is absolutely necessary.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on these issues.
Jon Nevett
President, Domain Dimensions, LLC
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|