Comments from the American Society of Association Executives
- To: <gtld-dispute@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Comments from the American Society of Association Executives
- From: "Robert Hay, Jr." <RHay@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 11:00:37 -0500
Comments to the New gTLD Program
As brand owners, associations and other nonprofit organizations share in
the concerns voiced by others about ICANN's Draft Application
Guidelines, dated 24 October 2008. However, the comments below focus
solely on the aspects of the Draft Application Guidelines that
specifically concern the interests of associations and other nonprofit
organizations above and beyond the interests of brand owners in general.
Guidelines should be adopted to better enable associations and other
nonprofit organizations to police their rights across the new gTLDs,
including guidelines for resolving conflicts between different
communities in connection with community based applications, lowering
the cost for associations and other nonprofit organizations of dispute
resolution in the creation of gTLDS, and clarifying the guidelines for
* ICANN should adopt guidelines for resolving conflicts between
different communities, particularly in the situation where a local or
regional association or other nonprofit organization is competing for a
new gTLD with an international nongovernmental organization. ICANN
needs a well-defined mechanism for resolving such an objection and
protecting the rights of associations and other nonprofit organizations.
* ICANN should adopt reduced fees for associations and other
nonprofit organizations that apply for a new gTLD.
Lower the Cost of Dispute Resolution for Associations and Other
* ICANN should adopt guidelines that shift the cost to unsuccessful
applicants based on a community objection from an association or other
nonprofit organization. That is, a prevailing association or other
nonprofit organization should be reimbursed for its costs and attorneys'
fees in connection with an objection. Such a policy would help prevent
applications for gTLDs that infringe upon the rights of communities.
* ICANN should clarify its procedures to indicate when potential
objectors should file objections to an application.
* ICANN should clarify the factors that will be considered in making
a determination that a community objector is an established
organization. Any certified association or other nonprofit organization
should have standing when the applied-for gTLD concerns the activities
of such an organization. Standing should not be a rigorous barrier to
participation in a dispute resolution proceeding.
* ICANN should clarify what is meant by "substantial opposition
within the community" to an applied-for gTLD. It should be sufficient
that an association or other nonprofit organization representing the
community objects to the applied-for gTLD.
* ICANN should clarify what is required to prove that there is a
likelihood of detriment to the rights or interests of the community. A
strong association between the activities of an organization and the
applied-for gTLD should create the presumption of a detriment,
particularly where the applicant has no association with the
* ICANN should clarify whether objections can be based on multiple
grounds and, if so, where such objections should be filed. Any
community based objection, whether or not it includes another ground of
objection, should be filed in the International Chamber of Commerce.
Submitted by the American Society of Association Executives
For more information please contact us at 202.326.9500 x2703