Changes

* 2006, March - In the Wellington Communiqué by ICANN's [[GAC]], the supporting body came out against the proposed .xxx. Also at that time, the ICANN Board voted down the revised registry agreement, but still did not throw out the application.

* 2006, March - In the Wellington Communiqué by ICANN's [[GAC]], the supporting body came out against the proposed .xxx. Also at that time, the ICANN Board voted down the revised registry agreement, but still did not throw out the application.

* 2007 - ICM had posted another iteration of the registry agreement for public comments, while, in March, the [[GAC]] noted that it did not believe that the ICANN Board sufficiently answered its questions regarding ICM and the sponsorship criteria. Subsequently, still at [[ICANN 28]] in Lisbon, the board voted down the ICM's application for .xxx. They noted that their decision was made based on the following findings: ICM does not meet the sponsorship requirements; the GAC believes that this lack of clear sponsorship will create public policy issues; the application raises significant law enforcement issues that it does not seek to rectify; the Board and GAC agree that the implementation would involve ICANN overseeing a significant amount of Internet content, which oversteps the organization's technical mandate.

* 2007, January - ICM had posted another iteration of the registry agreement for public comments,<ref>[http://www.webcitation.org/5gAwFTjYy "ICANN Publishes Revision to Proposed ICM (.xxx) Registry Agreement for Public Comment"]</ref> while, in March, the [[GAC]] noted that it did not believe that the ICANN Board sufficiently answered its questions regarding ICM and the sponsorship criteria. Subsequently, still at [[ICANN 28]] in Lisbon, the board voted down the ICM's application for .xxx. They noted that their decision was made based on the following findings: ICM does not meet the sponsorship requirements; the GAC believes that this lack of clear sponsorship will create public policy issues; the application raises significant law enforcement issues that it does not seek to rectify; the Board and GAC agree that the implementation would involve ICANN overseeing a significant amount of Internet content, which oversteps the organization's technical mandate.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/draft-icm-rationale-18mar11-en.pdf Draft ICM Rationale 18Mar11, ICANN.org]</ref>

 

 

* 2007,  January 6th- [[ICANN]] put up for public comment a revised proposal <ref>[http://www.webcitation.org/5gAwFTjYy "ICANN Publishes Revision to Proposed ICM (.xxx) Registry Agreement for Public Comment"]</ref> following changes to the policy of the ICM registry including the policing of any site that signs up to use the .xxx registry.

 

* 2010- February 19th, [[ICANN]]'s [[IRP]] (Independent Review Panel) issued a declaration in its review of ICM Registry's appeal.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm "Public Comment: Report of Possible Process Options for Further Consideration of the ICM Application for the .xxx sTLD"]</ref> The Panel found that the application for the ".xxx [[sTLD]] met the required sponsorship criteria," and that "the Board’s reconsideration of that finding was not consistent with the application of neutral, objective and fair documented policy."<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/irp/icm-v-icann/draft-options-post-irp-declaration-26mar10-en.pdf "ICANN Options Following the IRP Declaration on ICM's .xxx Application"]</ref> A 45 day public comment was opened on March 26, 2010.

* 2010- February 19th, [[ICANN]]'s [[IRP]] (Independent Review Panel) issued a declaration in its review of ICM Registry's appeal.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm "Public Comment: Report of Possible Process Options for Further Consideration of the ICM Application for the .xxx sTLD"]</ref> The Panel found that the application for the ".xxx [[sTLD]] met the required sponsorship criteria," and that "the Board’s reconsideration of that finding was not consistent with the application of neutral, objective and fair documented policy."<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/irp/icm-v-icann/draft-options-post-irp-declaration-26mar10-en.pdf "ICANN Options Following the IRP Declaration on ICM's .xxx Application"]</ref> A 45 day public comment was opened on March 26, 2010.