[gtld-council] Inputs on allocation from constituencies
- To: <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gtld-council] Inputs on allocation from constituencies
- From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:05:01 +1000
Below is a copy of the suggestions from each constituency on allocation
1. Registry Constituency
Criteria for choosing an allocation method
- objective (measurable)
- predictable (timelines followed rigorously)
- facilitate regular ongoing introduction of new gTLDs
Comparative evaluations of applicants should be minimized
(note there may be a queue of applicants that meet the requirements -
processed in first-come, first-served order).
Only where duplicate or confusing similar strings should special
allocation methods be used, and these allocation methods should be
defined in advance.
Define - how many TLDs can be introduced in any particular period (e.g
next 12 months) to provide predictability. How long it takes to enter
a TLD into root once approved, and the steps involved.
Ensure appropriate resources are allocated to manage the applications
2. Intellectual Property
Where two applicants apply for the same TLD string, that there is some
form of comparative evaluation taking into account intellectual property
Need a standard sunrise process for dealing with registrants within a
(the sunrise process could be developed via a separate PDP and then
required under contractual conditions)
Concerned about impact auctions or lottery may have on prior
intellectual property rights of the string.
Could have a set of available slots in a given year. The slots
themselves could support different allocation methods
e.g some could be auctioned, some could be random selection.
First-come, first-served - with auctions for contention for the same TLD
Concern about solely using auctions.
4. Business Constituency
If the selection criteria limit the number of applicants, then
first-come first served may be suitable. If however the selection
criteria result in many applicants, then the new gTLD may be allocated
in order of merit. The selection criteria would be weighted to allow
the comparative evaluation.
If there is contention for the same gtld string or purpose or community,
this would be resolved be assessing relative merit.
For example the .net allocation process consisted of absolute criteria
and relative criteria. For .net, all applicants met the absolute
criteria and then the decision was made on the basis of relative
5. Internet Service and Connectivity Providers
Principles similar to business constituency.
Don't support auctions. For example, with the concept of getting
community support for a particular gTLD, and then going to an auction, a
new party with more financial resources may be able to take advantage of
6. Non-commercial constituency
Auctions and lotteries should be considered for allocating new TLDs.
Lotteries are preferable for non-commercial applicants.