Domains (generic) -- gTLDs

Announcement marks start of a busy year and changing industry

WhatBox? has announced it will use a joint collaboration of NameJet and Afternic to auction domain names under its dot-menu gTLD.

The announcement marks what will soon be an explosion in efforts to sell "premium" domain names to the highest bidder as well as encourage large businesses to register domains under certain extensions.

Last minute flood of angry responses to new gTLD comment period

The domain name industry has responded angrily to an attempt by oversight organization ICANN to make last-minute changes to a contract covering new Internet extensions.

On the last day of a 21-day public comment period over the proposed changes, ICANN received 31 responses (40 in total). Most significant among them were joint letters from stakeholder groups within the organization all of which were highly critical of proposed changes to the registry contract for new gTLDs.

The Public Interest Registry has opened pre-registration for dot-ngo domains, encouraging non-profits and non-governmental organizations to indicate early interest in the registry.

Registration is through a simple online form and does not represent a commitment to purchase a domain (PIR is calling the process an "expression of interest"), but it will mean that organizations receive useful information and updates as the application progresses through to approval.

PIR's Chief Operating Officer Nancy Gofus explained to .Nxt that PIR expects dot-ngo domains (as well as the French version, dot-ong) to go live in early 2014 but that she wanted to reach out to the non-profit community early and "inform them of the steps they can take now".

ICANN has named 23 April as the date when the organization will formally approve the first of thousands of new Internet extensions.

Speaking in a pre-recorded interview, CEO Fadi Chehade said that the organization had made “great progress in the last few weeks” and so was confident that ICANN would be able to “recommend for delegation” the first of over 1,900 applications, just a few weeks after its upcoming meeting in Beijing.

The announcement of a specific date – even if Chehade is careful to point out that it may slip depending on factors outside his control – is a positive sign for the program which has been beset with delays since it was first conceived in 2005.

The “applicant guidebook” for the program was first published in 2008 and is currently in its ninth revision, with significant changes put forward by ICANN just this month.

Only small number of new gTLD applicants will consider rushed process

ICANN has attempted to answer concerns that new gTLD applicants may renege on public commitments with a last-minute contractual add-on.

Following a special Board meeting last weekend, the organization's COO this week outlined plans for a "public interest commitment" that would see applicants voluntarily agree to make aspects of their application binding.

ICANN subsequently published for public comment a revised version of its contract, complete with a new Specification 11. Within that specification, applicants can either list which parts of their application they wish to be considered binding - and so tied in with third-party dispute resolution complete with the risk of losing their rights to run the registry - or add additional information regarding existing commitments.

In May 2012, the Whois Review Team delivered its final report to the ICANN board with a real sense of achievement.

As the system for providing details about who is in charge of any given Internet domain name, the Whois is critical to the proper functioning the domain name system. As such, it is one of four issues highlighted for independent review under ICANN’s deal with the US Government, the Affirmation of Commitments.

Every three years, a cross-community team has to look at the extent to which ICANN’s Whois policy and implementation are effective, meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement and promote consumer trust.

Despite being an apparently inoffensive directory of contact details, Whois has proved one of the most intractable and divisive issues within the ICANN community for more than a decade. The reason why is due to the different interests rolled up within Whois, and how these interact with ICANN’s power dynamics.

US government intervenes, raising questions about ICANN stewardship

Verisign shares have plunged 15 percent, wiping $850 million off the company's value, on the news that it will not be allowed to raise prices on dot-com domains for the next six years.

The current wholesale price for dot-coms stands at $7.85 and the company had already agreed a six-year extension on its right to exclusively sell the domains with DNS overseeing organization ICANN. That agreement mirrored one signed in 2006 that allowed Verisign to raise the price by seven percent in four of the six years the contract ran.

However the contract was subject to approval by the US Department of Commerce and it decided to remove the price-rise clause before signing. A short statement issued by the DoC quoted Assistant Secretary Larry Strickling saying that "consumer will benefit from Verisign's removal of the automatic price increase".

GAC chair Heather Dryden discusses how government objections to new gTLD applications are going to work, and possible advice about further protections in the domain name system.

The governments of the world won the right to object to any of the 1,927 applications for new Internet extensions - and they are going to use that right.

We spoke to GAC chair Heather Dryden who explained how the "early warning" process is going to work and when the governmental "No" will be delivered.

The whole process of precise comments on particular applications is "a real change for the Committee", Heather notes. It is also "a test for GAC to deliver advice and early warning in the near term".

There will be a two-tier system with "early warnings" able to come from any single government, and then the much stronger "GAC advice" representing the consensus view of governments as a whole. The later is "much harder to accomplish - and that's by design".