27,652
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: +
→Timeline
It is a controversial topic that many applicants think was created quickly, with no outside input, and is presented in such a way that they feel compelled to make a decision without fully understanding the proposal. It seems to apply to a small subset of applicants, as only 145 of 1,409 strings were flagged by [[GAC]] Early Warnings, the primary target for PICs.<ref name= "PIC DI">[http://domainincite.com/11795-icanns-new-gtld-public-interest-commitments-idea-genius-or-pure-crazy ICANNs New gTLD Public Interest Commitments, DomainIncite.com] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref> The dispute resolution procedure, the Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Process or PICDRP, has yet to be defined. Applicants were given one month, until March 5th, to submit their PICs. It seemed to conflict with other deadlines, such as the end of objection filling just a week later, so, "potential objectors would have to decide whether to file their objections based on PICs that have been published for just one week and that could be amended post-deadline."<ref name= "PIC DI"></ref><ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/base-agreement-05feb13-en.htm Public Comment, Base Agreement, 5 Feb 13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref>
It is a controversial topic that many applicants think was created quickly, with no outside input, and is presented in such a way that they feel compelled to make a decision without fully understanding the proposal. It seems to apply to a small subset of applicants, as only 145 of 1,409 strings were flagged by [[GAC]] Early Warnings, the primary target for PICs.<ref name= "PIC DI">[http://domainincite.com/11795-icanns-new-gtld-public-interest-commitments-idea-genius-or-pure-crazy ICANNs New gTLD Public Interest Commitments, DomainIncite.com] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref> The dispute resolution procedure, the Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Process or PICDRP, has yet to be defined. Applicants were given one month, until March 5th, to submit their PICs. It seemed to conflict with other deadlines, such as the end of objection filling just a week later, so, "potential objectors would have to decide whether to file their objections based on PICs that have been published for just one week and that could be amended post-deadline."<ref name= "PIC DI"></ref><ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/base-agreement-05feb13-en.htm Public Comment, Base Agreement, 5 Feb 13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 4 Mar 2013</ref>
ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé noted around the imminent closing of the PIC submission date that this issue has the potential for pushing back the receipt of [[GAC]] advice and therefore the entire TLD implementation schedule, which is tightly fixed and aiming to recommend the first TLDs for delegation by April 23rd. ICANN will not recommend TLDs for implementation without the GAC's final advice, and the GAC seems to be placing a great import on the submission of PICs, to which the applicants remain wary.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12138-pics-could-be-beijing-deal-breaker-for-new-gtlds Application Download, PICS could be Beijing Deal Breaker for New gTLDs DomainIncite.com]Published March 4th, Retrieved March 5th 2013</ref>
===Registry Stakeholder Group Objects===
===Registry Stakeholder Group Objects===