GAC Advice

Communication

The GAC acknowledges that the new gTLD program provides mechanisms to address a range of risks and identified concerns. The Applicant Guidebook also provides a specific role for the GAC to provide early warnings and advice on new gTLD applications that raise public policy issues. In this context, and in light of the full range of received applications, individual GAC members are considering whether the existing mechanisms provided in the Guidebook are sufficient to address the identified issues in all instances. In the interest of sharing information with the community, and in advance of individual GAC members issuing any early warnings on specific applications, the GAC notes that individual GAC members are considering range of specific issues including:

• • Consumer protection
  • Strings that are linked to regulated market sectors, such as the financial, health and charity sectors
  • Competition issues
  • Strings that have broad or multiple uses or meanings, and where one entity is seeking exclusive use
  • Religious terms where the applicant has no, or limited, support from the relevant religious organisations or the religious community.
  • Minimising the need for defensive registrations
  • Protection of geographic names
  • Intellectual property rights particularly in relation to strings aimed at the distribution of music, video and other digital material
  • The relationship between new gTLD applications and all applicable legislation

The GAC looks forward to discussing these issues with the ICANN community, and expects to finalise GAC advice on gTLD applications following the ICANN meeting in April 2013. As part of this work, some GAC members may initiate direct dialogue with applicants, including through the early warning process. The GAC confirms that it will forward early warnings from GAC members on 20 November 2012, and encourages a collaborative and cooperative approach to addressing any issues identified in those early warnings.

The statements and commitments detailed in individual gTLD applications are a critical input to the GAC’s work in this area.

The GAC advises the ICANN Board:

• • that it is necessary for all of these statements of commitment and objectives to be transformed into binding contractual commitments, subject to compliance oversight by ICANN.

GAC Acknowledgement of Register Entry

15 November 2012

Next Steps/Required Action

Board to respond - 5 December 2012 11 January 2013, 16 January 2013

Board to follow up response - After 2 February 2013

Responsible Party

ICANN Board - Response Completed

ICANN Board - Follow up Completed

Target Completion Date

Response submitted on 16 January 2013

Current Status/Communications Log

Board Response to GAC Toronto Communique.pdf

Letter to GAC - Enforcing Applicant Commitments.pdf

Public Comment Period on PIC Specs

Board Action (Accept/Disagree)

16 January 2013 - 'The new gTLD Program does not currently provide for a mechanism to adopt binding contractual terms incorporating applicant statements and commitment and plans set forth within the new gTLD applications or arising from early warning discussions between applicants and governments. To address the concerns raised by the GAC as well as other stakeholders, staff are developing possible mechanisms for consideration by the Board New gTLD Committee. This Committee will discuss the staff proposals during the upcoming Board Workshop, 31 January - 2 February. We anticipate providing the GAC with an update on our progress on this matter shortly after the conclusion of the Board Workshop'

8 February 2013 - 'The proposed PIC Spec is a mechanism by which applicants may incorporate additional commitments into their Registry Agreements. As proposed, the PIC Spec has one mandatory provision and two optional provisions. It would require the Registry Operator to use only those registrars that sign onto the 2013 Registrar Accreditation Agreement. It would also allow the Registry Operator to contractually agree to follow the commitments made in certain sections of its application for the gTLD (the specific sections to be selected by the Registry Operator). Finally it would allow the Registry Operator to identify specific additional commitments - which could be even broader than those undertaken in the application - that it will follow n the operation of the registry. Each PIC Spec completed by an applicant would be posted for public review in advance of the Beijing meeting. Once finalized, the relevant PIC Spec would be attached to the relevant Registry Agreement. The Registry Agreement would not be signed until the PIC Spec is completed.

Enforcement
The commitment to use only Registrars that have signed the new RAA will be enforceable through the regular contractual compliance process within ICANN. The additional commitments would primarily be enforceable by third parties through a revised Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Process. Once the Registry Agreement is in operation, third parties who suffer actual harm as a result of the Registry
Operator's alleged noncompliance with the additional commitments or restrictions contained in the PIC Spec would have standing to proceed to dispute resolution. This dispute resolution procedure would be made part of the existing Registry Restriction Post Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PDDRP) and Trademark PDDRP <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb>. First, there would be a mandatory conciliation phase during which the third party and the Registry Operator are expected to try to informally resolve the issue. If the issue cannot be resolved, the third party complainant will then proceed to a Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure (PIC-DRP)
operated by a dispute resolution provider. If the provider issues findings and recommendations that the Registry Operator is violating the PIC Spec, the matter would then proceed to ICANN's Contractual Compliance for enforcement.

Timeframe
As noted above, the PIC Spec and other proposed revisions to the Registry Agreement were posted for public comment on 5 February 2013. Applicants were also invited to optionally designate which parts of their application and which additional promises they will agree to have included in their registry agreement. Applicants’ PICs are due on 5 March 2013, and will be publicly posted for public and GAC review.'