ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] .CH: Another example of Vertical Integration

  • To: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] .CH: Another example of Vertical Integration
  • From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 12:13:44 -0400

My understanding of a gTLD that would "closely resemble ccTLDs in
setup and purpose" would mainly be ...

Agree that the laundry list of municipal government, regional government, cultural and linguistic communities ... are the set of potential applications that would "closely resemble ccTLDs in
setup and purpose".

                                          and maybe also .unicef,
.redcross and the like).

This was the point of my question to Krista, if the IPC's proposal was intended to be inclusive of those entities who's name is not protected by trademark, but by treaty, e.g., UNICEF.

Identifiers protected by treaty are similar to identifiers managed by the iso3166/MA in that they arise from public rather than private interest, and so are reasonable additions to the laundry list of municipal, regional, cultural and linguistic, ... applicants who's basis for submitting an application, and operational practice, "closely resemble ccTLDs in setup and purpose".

Finding a good definition and contractual
provisions for those is not a neglible task, but one I feel ICANN
staff is well equipped for.


In any case, the provider would have to qualify as a community TLD,
and maybe fulfill further yet TBD requirements as well.

I don't know that "community" is the right box. Community-like, yes, but TBD.

Just to be clear, I am not suddenly advocating limiting VI
possibilities to such TLDs.



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy