Welcome to the GAC website! Effective 18 December 2018, this site is the GAC’s sole web resource for news and information about GAC activities. If you have difficulty finding any current or past GAC information, please email gac-staff@icann.org.

GAC Advice

The GAC provides advice to the ICANN Board on policy matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN’s policies and various laws, international agreements and public policy objectives. GAC Advice is communicated to the ICANN Board through either a Communique or a formal piece of Correspondence. This area of the website provides you with full access to both types of GAC Advice as well as the comprehensive historical list of GAC advice provided to the Board and links connecting that advice to its outcome using the ICANN Board Advice Registry tool.

 

GAC Advice

Reference No. :

2013-11-20-Cat1-Cat2

First Delivered via :

N/A

Consenus:

Consensus met

2013-11-20-Cat1-Cat2

Communication

1. Category 1 and Category 2 Safeguard Advice

The GAC welcomed the response of the Board to the GAC's Beijing Communiqué advice on Category 1 and Category 2 safeguards. The GAC received useful information regarding implementation of the safeguards during its discussions with the New gTLD Program Committee. GAC members asked for clarification of a number of issues and look forward to ICANN's response.

    1. The GAC highlights the importance of its Beijing advice on 'Restricted Access' registries, particularly with regard to the need to avoid undue preference and/or undue disadvantage.
      1. The GAC requests
        1. A briefing on whether the Board considers that the existing PIC specifications (including 3c) fully implements this advice.
    2. The GAC requests a briefing on the public policy implications of holding auctions to resolve string contention (including community applications).
    3. The GAC considers that new gTLD registry operators should be made aware of the importance of protecting children and their rights consistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
    4. The GAC advises the ICANN Board:
      1. to re-categorize the string .doctor as falling within Category 1 safeguard advice addressing highly regulated sectors, therefore ascribing these domains exclusively to legitimate medical practitioners. The GAC notes the strong implications for consumer protection and consumer trust, and the need for proper medical ethical standards, demanded by the medical field online to be fully respected.
    5. The GAC welcomes the Board’s communication with applicants with regard to open and closed gTLDs, but seeks written clarification of how strings are identified as being generic.

Next Steps/Required Action

Board Response - Received on 10 February 2014

Beijing Advice - 2013-04-11-Safeguards-Categories-1

Responsible Party

ICANN Board

Current Status/Communications Log

Board Response - Regulated Market Sectors:

The NGPC accepts the advice. The NGPC adopts the implementation framework attached as Annex 2 <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-2-05feb14-en.pdf> to address this advice, and directs the ICANN President and CEO, or his designee, to implement the Category 1 Safeguard advice consistent with the implementation framework.

With respect to the additional advice in the Buenos Aires Communiqué on the Category 1 Safeguards, the NGPC accepts the advice to re-categorize the string .doctor as falling within Category 1 safeguard advice addressing highly regulated sectors and ensure that the domains in the .doctor TLD are ascribed exclusively to legitimate medical practitioners.

Board Response - Exclusive Registry Access:

ICANN contacted the 186 applicants for strings identified in the GAC’s Category 2 safeguard advice. The applicants were asked to respond by a specified date indicating whether the applied-for TLD will be operated as an exclusive access registry. An overwhelming majority of the applicants (174) indicated that the TLD would not be operated as an exclusive access registry. The NGPC adopted a resolution directing staff to move forward with the contracting process for applicants for strings identified in the Category 2 Safeguards that were prepared to enter into the Registry Agreement as approved, since moving forward with these applicants was consistent with the GAC’s advice.

Twelve applicants responded that the TLD would be operated as an exclusive access registry. These 12 applicants have applied for the following strings: .BROKER, .CRUISE, .DATA, .DVR, .GROCERY, .MOBILE, .PHONE, .STORE, .THEATER, .THEATRE and .TIRES. Staff requested the applicants to provide an explanation of how the proposed exclusive registry access serves a public interest goal. The responses have been received. ICANN staff will forward the responses to the NGPC and the GAC so that the responses can be considered prior to the Singapore meeting.

The NGPC accepts the advice in the Buenos Aires Communiqué. As requested in in the Buenos Aires Communiqué, the NGPC has provided a written clarification to the GAC on whether the Board considers that the existing PIC specifications (including 3c) fully implements this advice. (Available here: Requests for Written Briefings/Reports)

With respect to the additional advice in the Buenos Aires Communiqué on the Category 1 Safeguards, the NGPC accepts the advice to re-categorize the string .doctor as falling within Category 1 safeguard advice addressing highly regulated sectors and ensure that the domains in the .doctor TLD are ascribed exclusively to legitimate medical practitioners.

Board Scorecard-Updated 5 February 2014

8 September 2013: NGPC Scorecard

Scorecard response: The NGPC continues to deliberate on how to implement the GAC’s advice concerning exclusive registry access for strings representing generic terms. As previously noted, twelve applicants responded that the TLD would be operated as an exclusive access registry. These 12 applicants have applied for the following strings: .BROKER, .CRUISE, .DATA, .DVR, .GROCERY, .MOBILE, .PHONE, .STORE, .THEATER, .THEATRE and .TIRES.
In response to ICANN’s request, each of the 12applicants have provided an explanation of how exclusive access registry for the applied-for TLD
would serve a public interest goal. At its 21 June 2014 meeting, the NGPC discussed possible next steps to consider the GAC’s advice, and considered whether it would be appropriate and beneficial to initiate a public comment period concerning the responses from the 12 applicants.
The NGPC directed staff to prepare potential questions that could be used to frame a possible public comment forum, and agreed to consider this matter further at a subsequent meeting. The NGPC is actively working on this matter and anticipates further considering this matter during its meeting at ICANN 51 in Los Angeles.

Board Action (Accept/Disagree)

Accept