ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Strong Support from Mark Kumagai of GMO Internet Group (applying for DotShop)

  • To: eoi-new-gtlds@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Strong Support from Mark Kumagai of GMO Internet Group (applying for DotShop)
  • From: "info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:07:50 +0900

To begin with, I'd like to express my support for the proposed EOI in new gTLDs.
I think we all agree that it's time to break the ice and begin the process, as 
much has already been discussed.
Having said that, here are my thoughts in regards to the matter:

How do we ensure that participation in the EOI accurately represents the level 
of interest?
Although some might disagree, in order to avoid frivolous applications that 
would only hinder the process, I believe that an applicant ought to bear 
similar, if not the same amount of financial risk and responsiblity as it were 
applying in the official round.  By doing so, ICANN would receive an accurate 
number of serious applications, whilst applicants would
benefit from less hassle and possibly a quicker outcome than what is currently 
A non-refundable deposit of up to $100,000, which shall be counted towards the 
total cost, would do the job of eliminating haphazard applications and 
promoting serious level of interests, thereby expediting the process that has 
already fallen behind schedule.

Should only those who participate in the EOI be eligible to participate in the 
first round when the program officially launches?
If not, it would defy the purpose of measuring accurate levels of interests.

Should a deposit be required for participation in the EOI?
Certainly, and for all the reasons above, a non-refundable deposit ought to be 
implemented in the EOI.

If there is a fee, under what circumstances should there be refund?
In order to accurately reflect the number of serious applicants, refunds should 
not be accepted under any circumstances.

What information should be collected from EOI participants?
1. Applying string name
2. Description of the string
3. Who is applying (including entity info)
Of the three, "who is applying for what" should be made public in order to 
leave doors open for discussions and resolutions amongst applicants.

Must the responder commit to go live within a certain time of delegation?
Yes, for gTLD's, but must not be mandated by a tight time frame.
No, for closed communities as they should be given the right to decide to begin 
with, unless objections are filed.

What are the implications for potential changes to the Applicant Guidebook 
after the EOI participation period closes?
1. Acknowlegding participation to EOI as a mandatory step
2. Deducting EOI fee from the overall application fee

What are the potential risks associated with the EOI?
If ICANN decides to solve at EOI, whatever issue they come across, the entire 
process could easily be delayed.

Mark Kumagai
GMO Internet Group
20-1 Sakuragaoka-cho,Shibuya-ku,Tokyo (150-0031) Japan

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy