Return to .org Reassignment Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: ISOC
Date/Time: Thu, July 18, 2002 at 9:07 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V6.0 using Windows NT 5.0
Score: 5
Subject: ISOC's replies to Clint's questions


Dear Clint:

Thank you for your query.  Here are your questions and ISOC's replies:

QUESTION 1: Do you intend to protect existing registrants from revocation of their domain names based solely upon the premise that the registrant  is not registered as a 501(c)(3) organization or is without some other not-for-profit organization designation?

ANSWER 1: ISOC will respect all existing registrations without regard to the not-for-profit status of the registrant.

QUESTION 2: Do you intend to amend or add to the UDRP to reflect a new policy that a name can be transferred to another registrant based solely upon the fact that the existing registrant cannot prove to the arbitration panel that the domain name in question is being used for Non-commercial activities by a not-for-profit organization?


QUESTION 3: Will ISOC continue to support a .ORG registry that is open for registration by the general public, as recommended in item 2b of the  Final Report (version 5.4) on .ORG divestiture (1), drafted by the  DNSO Dot Org Names Council Task Force?

ANSWER 3: ISOC intends to market and position .ORG as the global home of non-commercial organizations on the Internet.  However, unless otherwise directed by ICANN, ISOC will support all existing registrations and continue to accept new registrations for .ORG without restriction.

QUESTION 4: Even though all of the proposals indicate each applicant's determination to differentiate the marketing techniques for the .ORG  gTLD, if selected, would you (as the new registry operator) continue to embrace the openness of .ORG as a "generic" gTLD (without registrant restrictions) as originally reflected in RFC 1591(2)?

ANSWER 4: As clarification, RFC 1591, written in March of 1994, says the following about .ORG:  "This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for organizations that didn't fit anywhere else.  Some non-government organizations may fit here." (

.ORG has evolved since 1994 and has acquired meaning beyond "miscellaneous."  Specifically, research conducted on behalf of ISOC in support of the ISOC bid shows that .ORG is now the leading source of information about non-commercial entities on the Internet -- even beating .COM in that respect.  .ORG now has a well-established heritage, a position of strength from which to move into a future that will almost certainly be cluttered with TLDs.  The steward of .ORG must harness this strength, and it is ISOC's plan to do so.

ISOC plans to invest .ORG marketing effort to attract non-commercial activity to the domain.  This includes positioning it for non-commercial activity and reaching out to non-commercial organizations with training and other activities.  Further, we recognize that many commercial organizations have non-commercial activities (e.g. charitable giving) which are rightfully housed in .ORG.  We will welcome all of this activity.

ISOC does not plan activities designed to identify and eliminate other kinds of activity within the domain.  We believe it is within neither the mission nor the resources of the registry to engage in this type of policing.

In summary, we plan to build on .ORGs strength by focusing on the non-commercial aspects of .ORG rather than attempting to police commercial use.

Thanks for the opportunity to elaborate on these elements of our plan.

--Lynn St.Amour
President/CEO, The Internet Society


Link: More information about ISOC's bid for .ORG

Message Thread:

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy