Comments on the new TLD Program and the Applicant Guidebook
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the New Generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) Proposed Final Applicant Guidebook (the Guidebook). Our colleagues in the company Lego have thoroughly gone through the revised Applicant Guidebook, and we fully support the comments given by Mette M. Andersen from Lego (see attached) posted on 11 January 2011, see http://forum.icann.org/lists/5gtld-guide/index.html As will be seen from this document, it is clear that the ICANN group responsible for the proposed new TLD program does not seem to take seriously into account the concerns - thoroughly documented, motivated and explained - expressed during the past many months from the numerous companies and persons interested in a well functioning internet which at the same time provides legitimate protection for trademark rights. It is apparent that the opportunity given by ICANN for public comments is in reality a fake one. ICANN has no obligation to take these comments into serious account, and ICANN therefore does not. This only confirms what would be the only logical assumption in a commercial world namely that the only thing that drives this new proposed program is MONEY and not a sincere concern for the optimum functionality of the internet. The entities that have economic interests in the realisation of this extremely costly program are ICANN and the Registrants. The problem with the Registrants is that they have a double role in relation the companies and other entities that might contemplate buying a tld in the proposed Program. They are at the same time advisors and sellers. - No wonder therefore that the Registrars - along with the ICANN - only express a favourable view on the Program. And the brand owners - who are to finance the whole thing - and the average private internet user, none of whom have expressed any interest in this program, are not dominant in the debate and have no real influence on the realisation or not of the Program. ICANN has recently issued a very interesting report prepared for them, namely the following: "Economic Considerations in the Expansion of Generic Top-Level Domain Names Phase II Report: Case Studies - prepared for ICANN" http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/phase-two-economic-considerations-03dec10-en.pdf On its page 7, the following is stated: "Consumers generally benefit from additional competition, which reduces quality-adjusted prices and/or increases variety, including the introduction of new products and services. Based on an examination of available data, however, our earlier report concluded that past gTLD introductions (e.g., .biz and .info) have not had significant competitive impact on .com's dominance in the registration of second-level domain names" Does this fit with the motivation given by ICANN to the new program? - No, it does not. On the page in which ICANN presents the program for readers "New to the Program", you can read the following: "Since ICANN was founded, one of its foundational principles has been to promote competition in the domain name marketplace while ensuring Internet security and stability. The expansion of gTLDs is expected to allow for more innovation, choice and change to the Internet's addressing system." "The expansion of gTLDs is expected to allow for more innovation, choice and change to the Internet's addressing system" says ICANN (see above), but where is the documentation? There is NO documentation available supporting the conclusion that the internet suffers from "insufficient competition in the domain name marketplace", ALL is based on unsupported "expectation". In our view this whole Program should be HALTED until sufficient and convincing documentation has been produced. If such documentation cannot be produced, which the above conclusions from the Economic Case Study seem to suggest, the Program as a whole should be cancelled, sooner rather than later. Enough resources have now been spent by the internet community on this stillborn project. The fact of the matter is that the only entities that are in favour of the Program are the ones who can make money out of it, and that is ICANN and the Registrars. The "internet community", including private users and brand owners, are NOT interested. There is no available documentation which contradicts that it is not both easy and cheap to acquire and use suitable domain names under the current system and there is no documentation showing that significant improvements would be obtained with the proposed Program, especially not when taking into consideration the enormous costs which are involved. Søren Ingemann Larsen Trademark and Domain Name counsel H.Lundbeck A/S Ottiliavej 9 DK-2500 Copenhagen Valby Denmark Dir.: +45 3643 2123 Mob.: +45 3083 2123 Fax: +45 3643 8301 sl@xxxxxxxxxxxx www.lundbeck.com Attachment:
2011.01.11 Lego comments.pdf |