Whereas, on 11 September 2013, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) issued advice to the ICANN Board that it had finalized its consideration of the strings .WINE and .VIN.
Whereas, the GAC advised the ICANN Board that there was no GAC consensus advice on additional safeguards for .WINE and .VIN, and the applications for .WINE and .VIN should proceed through the normal evaluation process.
Whereas, in the Buenos Aires Communiqué, the GAC noted that the Board may wish to seek a clear understanding of the legally complex and politically sensitive background on its advice regarding .WINE and .VIN in order to consider the appropriate next steps of delegating the two strings.
Whereas, the NGPC commissioned an analysis [PDF, 772 KB] of the legally complex and politically sensitive background on the GAC's advice regarding .WINE and .VIN, which the NGPC considered as part of its deliberations on the GAC's advice.
Whereas, the Bylaws (Article XI, Section 2.1) require the ICANN Board to address advice put to the Board by the GAC.
Whereas, the NGPC is undertaking this action pursuant to the authority granted to it by the Board on 10 April 2012, to exercise the ICANN Board's authority for any and all issues that may arise relating to the New gTLD Program.
Resolved (2014.03.22.NG01), the NGPC accepts the GAC advice identified in the GAC Register of Advice as 2013-09-09-wine and vin, and directs the President and CEO, or his designee, that the applications for .WINE and .VIN should proceed through the normal evaluation process.
Rationale for Resolution 2014.03.22.NG01
The NGPC's action today, addressing the open item of GAC advice concerning .WINE and .VIN, is part of the ICANN Board's role to address advice put to the Board by the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). Article XI, Section 2.1 of the ICANN Bylaws <http://www.icann.org/en/about/governance/bylaws#XI> permit the GAC to "put issues to the Board directly, either by way of comment or prior advice, or by way of specifically recommending action or new policy development or revision to existing policies." The GAC issued advice to the Board on the New gTLD Program through its Beijing Communiqué dated 11 April 2013, its Durban Communiqué dated 18 July 2013, and its Buenos Aires Communiqué dated 20 November 2013. The GAC also issued advice to the ICANN Board in a letter dated 9 September 2013 concerning .WINE and .VIN. The ICANN Bylaws require the Board to take into account the GAC's advice on public policy matters in the formulation and adoption of the polices. If the Board decides to take an action that is not consistent with the GAC advice, it must inform the GAC and state the reasons why it decided not to follow the advice. The Board and the GAC will then try in good faith to find a mutually acceptable solution. If no solution can be found, the Board will state in its final decision why the GAC advice was not followed.
The action being approved today is to accept the GAC's advice to the ICANN Board that there was no GAC consensus advice on additional safeguards for .WINE and .VIN, and the GAC "has finalized its consideration of the strings .wine and .vin and further advises that the application should proceed through the normal evaluation process." The effect of the NGPC's action concerning the GAC advice on .WINE and .VIN is that the strings will continue to proceed through the normal evaluation process and no additional safeguards will be required for the TLDs.
As part of its consideration of the GAC advice, ICANN posted the GAC advice and officially notified applicants of the advice, triggering the 21-day applicant response period pursuant to the Applicant Guidebook Module 3.1. The complete set of applicant responses are provided at: <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/gac-advice/>. The NGPC has considered the applicant responses in formulating its response to the item of GAC advice being addressed today.
Additionally, on 28 September 2013, the NGPC noted that it stood ready to hear from GAC members as to the nature of the differences in views expressed in the advice while the NGPC analyzed the GAC's advice. Several governments provided letters to the NGPC expressing the nature of their views on whether the GAC's advice on the .WINE and .VIN TLDs should be imposed, with some individual governments expressing concerns that additional safeguards should be imposed before the strings are delegated, while others recommended that no additional safeguards should be imposed on the strings.
In response to the GAC's suggestion in the Buenos Aires Communiqué, the NGPC commissioned an analysis of the legally complex and politically sensitive background on this matter in the context of the GAC advice in order to consider the appropriate next steps of delegating .WINE and .VIN. The expert analysis concluded that "[a]s regards the applications for the assignment of the new gTLDs '.vin' and '.wine' filed by the Donuts company, there is no rule of the law of geographical indications, nor any general principle which obliges ICANN to reject the applications or accept the applications under certain specific conditions."
As part of its deliberations, the NGPC reviewed the following materials and documents:
GAC Beijing Communiqué:https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Final_GAC_Communique_Durban_20130718.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1375787122000&api=v2 [PDF, 238 KB]
GAC Durban Communiqué:https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Final_GAC_Communique_Durban_20130717.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1374215119858&api=v2 [PDF, 104 KB]
GAC Buenos Aires Communiqué: https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/FINAL_Buenos_Aires_GAC_Communique_20131120.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1385055905332&api=v2 [PDF, 97 KB]
Letter from H. Dryden to S. Crocker dated 11 September 2013 re: .vin and wine:
https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Letter%20from%20GAC%20Chair%20to%20ICANN%20Board_20130909.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1379026679000&api=v2[ PDF, 63 KB]
Applicant responses to GAC advice: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/gac-advice/
Applicant Guidebook, Module 3: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/objection-procedures-04jun12-en.pdf[PDF, 261 KB]
There are no foreseen fiscal impacts associated with the adoption of this resolution. Approval of the resolution will not impact security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS. As part of ICANN's organizational administrative function, ICANN posted the Buenos Aires GAC advice and officially notified applicants of the advice on 11 December 2013. The Durban Communiqué and the Beijing Communiqué were posted on 18 April 2013 and 1 August 2013, respectively. In each case, this triggered the 21-day applicant response period pursuant to the Applicant Guidebook Module 3.1.
Source: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-22mar14-en.htm#1.a
700 new gTLDs are launching with accredited Registrar 1&1, get your new .WINE and .VIN domain names today.
No comments:
Post a Comment