[lac-discuss-en] [GTLD-WG] New gTLD Program Committee resolution on "closed generic" strings

[Hong Xue]

>
> Since I don't now know the business models that are to be adopted by these
> so-called closed string registries, I'm disadvantaged in determining harm,
> if any.  And assuming you could find some, I would likely consider those in
> context of the roadblocks faced by say a regular cat lover buying a domain
> in the .cat registry and wishing to use it to the greater glory of some
> haughty puss.  Every man has the right to his poison. Hell, that might just
> be a manifestation of one of them cat-loving fetishes like the ancient
> Egyptians! Tell me quick, why should that intent be rubbished or
> dispossessed?
>

I think ICANN is going back to deal with the key issue of whether to
interprete or monitor or control the registration policy (who can be
the registrants and what can be registered as domain names)  of a new
TLD committed in the application. This does not only involve "closed
generic" TLD strings but many other issues, such as protection of
IGO/INGO names, management of IDN variants and maintenance of the
"closeness" of the community-based TLDs. Currently, all the
application committments are yet to be included in the delegation
agreement and thus will not be subject to the "compliance" mechanism.
Should ICANN change this Laissez-faire approach, generally or specific
for closed generic TLD strings? I think ICANN should have a holistic
view.

Hong



-- 
Professor Dr. Hong Xue
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
Beijing Normal University
http://www.iipl.org.cn/
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China