New Top-Level Domain Applicant Group: Difference between revisions

Line 19:

===Strawman Proposal===

In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]

In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref>

==Current Officers==

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 ===Strawman Proposal===
-In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf  TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]
+In January 2013, The NTAG was one of about 85 entities to respond to [[ICANN]]'s [[Strawman Proposal]], which is a strategy for implementing rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for brands and trademark holders beyond what was originally included in the applicant guidebook on new TLDs.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11619-new-gtld-strawman-splits-community?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 Strawman Splits Community, DomainIncite.com]Published & Retrieved 16 Jan 2013]</ref> The NTAG, and others, see the closed-door meetings that produced the more stringent and broader RPMs to be against the ICANN development process that created the [[New gTLD Program]] and the governing applicant guidebook.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11064-straw-man-proposed-to-settle-trademark-deadlock-at-secretive-icann-meeting Strawman Proposed to Settle Trademark Deadlock at Secretive ICANN meeting, DomainIncite.com]Published Novemeber 19 2012, Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref> They note that any positive decision related to the Strawman would be unwelcome 'implementation' rather than 'development'. It encourages ICANN to present its proposed changes to the [[GNSO]] to allow for community development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/tmch-strawman/pdf7OB7v1fQzV.pdf  TMCH Strawman, Forum.ICANN.org]Retrieved 17 Jan 2013</ref>
 ==Current Officers==