ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June

  • To: <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
  • From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 03:39:27 +1000

Hello Ross,

> One must consider that in order for something  to be "shown to be in 
> violation of the laws of the jurisdiction...etc" that some sort of 
> judicial process must be engaged.

I think the real issue here is one of timing.

The process is about deciding whether to add a new top level domain.
Giving enough time for a judicial process to be resolved (e.g stopping
an application if there is notice of a legal case) may be used as a
delay tactic.   Alternatively simply creating the top level domain, and
then having to remove it after a legal case may cause issues for
registrants that are now using the domain.   This is not good for

Thus the idea is to see if we can come up with a fast track dispute
resolution process that is based on international law to decide whether
or not to add a string within months rather than years.   Any process we
create however should be capable of judicial review.    Hopefully the
dispute process will give the right outcome in at least 80% of cases,
and thus has value.    

Note however that this is different to the process used at the second
level, where names are added and then dispute processes are used after
the fact.    I feel that some GNSO constituencies and the GAC/SSAC would
probably not support this model - at least initially.


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy