Re: [gtld-council] Outcomes of the Brussels meeting on policies for contractual conditions

[Liz Williams <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All

Thanks so much for these further clarifications.  However, it's 11th  
hour and 11th minute in terms of writing the initial report.  I will  
do my best to incorporate these points of view in time for the  
release of the draft Initial Report in time for our 15 June meeting.
Liz
.....................................................

Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob




On 03 Jun 2006, at 17:51, Marilyn Cade wrote:

> Thanks, Mawaki.
>
> Excellent points. However, we also need to be cautious about the term
> "global". All TLDS resolve globally, and that is part of the end to  
> end
> principle and commitment of ICANN. We had a debate something like  
> this very
> early on at ICANN because there was a view that cc's were national  
> only in
> scope, and of course, while they have national characteristics,  
> they resolve
> globally.
>
> It occurs to me that this definition will need vetting with the  
> ccNSO/cc
> fuller community.
>
>
> Marilyn Cade
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango
> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: Bruce Tonkin; gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gtld-council] Outcomes of the Brussels meeting on  
> policies for
> contractual conditions
>
> Hello Bruce & TF,
>
> This is a contribution/reply to an old email... from Brussels.
> I'd like to suggest the following definition for gTLD.
>
> gTLD = a generic TLD is a top or first level Internet domain
> name that is unique, global in scope and defined through an
> exclusive contract with ICANN; it includes but is not limited to
> the current sponsored and unsponsored TLDs.
>
> You (esp. techies and policy staff; pls no lawyers ;)) may want
> to confirm if "unique" and "exclusive contract" are Ok, as I see
> them, but I'd like to insist having "global in scope" or
> something like that (to mean they're geography-blinded, don't
> pertain to any specific region). Because in my interactions, I
> have come to realize that (a) signicant (number of) people in
> the US seem to think gTLDs are american TLDs and the rest of the
> world should be content with ccTLDs only. No offence... just
> clarity.
>
> Best,
> Mawaki
>
> --- Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > The following were areas of agreement amongst the participants
> > in the
> > Brussels meeting for policy guidelines that relate to
> > contractual
> > conditions.   These will be incorporated into an initial
> > report.  The
> > intent will also be to include a "model" or "reference"
> > agreement that
> > complies with these guidelines to assist in providing a
> > practical
> > example of how the guidelines may be applied.
> >
> >
> > Use "gTLD licence holder" instead of "Registry Operator" as
> > this has a
> > range of meanings.
> >
> > "gTLD" = "a generic TLD that has a contract with ICANN,
> > includes but is
> > not limited to the current sponsored and unsponsored TLDs"
> >
> >
> > 1.      There should be a frame agreement to provide some level of
> > consistency (e.g as for the registrars accreditation
> > agreement), with
> > the ability for staff to have delegated authority to approve.
> >
> > 2.      Any material alterations to the frame agreement, subject to
> > public comments before approval by the ICANN Board.
> >
> >
> > 3. The contract should strike the right balance between
> > ensuring
> > certainty for market players and preserving flexibility of
> > ICANN to
> > accommodate the rapidly changing market, technological and
> > policy
> > conditions.
> >
> > 4. The initial term of commercially reasonable length (e.g
> > default 10
> > years, although may be changed on a case-by-case basis).
> >
> >
> > 5. There should be a renewal expectancy.     A contract would
> > be renewed
> > provided that the license holder is not in material breach of
> > the
> > contract, or has not been found in repeated non-performance of
> > the
> > contract, and provided the license holder agrees to any new
> > framework
> > contract conditions that are reasonably acceptable.    Any new
> > framework
> > contract would take into account the consensus policies in
> > place at that
> > time.
> >
> > 6. There should be an ability to terminate the contract if the
> > gtld
> > licence holder has  been found in repeated non-performance of
> > the
> > contract.
> >
> > 7. During the term of the agreement, the registry must comply
> > with new
> > or changed consensus policies to one or more of the following
> > areas:
> > -       (1) issues for which uniform or coordinated resolution is
> > reasonably necessary to facilitate interoperability, Security
> > and/or
> > Stability of the Internet or DNS;
> >
> > -       (2) functional and performance specifications for the
> > provision
> > of Registry Services (as defined in Section 3.1(d)(iii)
> > below);
> >
> > -       (3) Security and Stability of the registry database for the
> > TLD;
> >
> >
> > -       (4) registry policies reasonably necessary to implement
> > Consensus Policies relating to registry operations or
> > registrars;
> >
> > -       or (5) resolution of disputes regarding the registration of
> > domain names (as opposed to the use of such domain names).
> >
> > 8. Any deviation from consensus policies should be explicitly
> > stated and
> > justified in the agreement
> >
> >
> > 9. Where a registry provides IDNs, the contract should require
> > that the
> > registry adhere to IDN standards, and ICANN guidelines for
> > IDNs.
> >
> > 10. Initially rely on the appropriate external
> > competition/anti-trust
> > Government authorities to ensure compliance with laws relating
> > to market
> > power or pricing power.   This can be reviewed after initial
> > term.
> >
> > 11. ICANN should take a consistent approach with respect to
> > registry
> > fees - taking into account differences in regional, economic
> > and
> > business models
> >
> > 13. Use of Personal Data: limit it to the purpose for which it
> > is
> > collected, and define the extent to which it is made available
> > to third
> > parties.
> >
> >
> > Further work required to identify whether to address other
> > forms of
> > registry data, such as traffic data, before any policy
> > recommendation in
> > this area can be made.