27,652
edits
Changes
→GAC Early Warnings
====GAC Early Warnings====
====GAC Early Warnings====
Minds + Machines received a total fo 6 [[GAC]] Early Warnings, 5 of which were for its own TLDs. This accounts for about 7% of their 72 applications, which they noted in a press release, further stating that many of their competitors and other large portfolio applicants had received much greater percentages of warned applications to total portfolio size. The in-house warned applications are: [[.zulu]], [[.hotel]], [[.green]], [[.roma]], [[.website]]. Their client, The American Bible Society, was warned for [[.bible]].<ref>[http://www.tldh.org/2012/11/icann-prioriisation-draw/ ICANN Prioritization Draw, TLDH.org] Retrieved 1 Dec 2012</ref>
Minds + Machines received a total fo 6 [[GAC]] Early Warnings, 5 of which were for its own TLDs. This accounts for about 7% of their 72 applications, which they noted in a press release, further stating that many of their competitors and other large portfolio applicants had received much greater percentages of warned applications to total portfolio size. The in-house warned applications are: [[.zulu]], [[.hotel]], [[.green]], [[.roma]], [[.website]]. Their client, The American Bible Society, was warned for [[.bible]].<ref>[http://www.tldh.org/2012/11/icann-prioriisation-draw/ ICANN Prioritization Draw, TLDH.org] Retrieved 1 Dec 2012</ref>
===PICs===
TLDH submitted a [[PIC|Public Interest Commitment]] (PIC) for every one of its gTLD applications. PICs are voluntary amendments that applicants can create, sign, and undertake along with the general registry agreement in order to hold their registry operations to certain standards. They seem to originally have been developed as a way to allow applicants to appease [[GAC]] members that may be concerned about how their application stands as is, or how ICANN will be able to ensure a potential registry remains compliant with its aspirations and mandate as it defined in its summary of its proposed operations in the TLD application. Prior to PICs, there was no clear way of defining operating procedures when moving from the long form essays in the TLD application to the Registry Agreement.
The PICs TLDHs submitted largely reinforce the best practices and protections it defined in its applications, and the company notes in its submissions that it supports the PIC process and the GAC concern that created it, but that much of the PIC remains undefined and so they remain committed to providing further structure to the idea of the PIC. TLDH seems to simultaneously submit PICs while also noting that they are not prepared to accept the PIC program or their commitments as final.
Their PICs provide for: open registration policies; geographic names protections; clearly defining abusive behavior to registrants and the public and enforcing those parameters; the right to suspend, cancel, or otherwise take control of names that are suspected or proven of being involved in abusive activities; and maintaining a clear, singular point of contact for all abuse related correspondence. Some of their PICs, those related to applications with restricted registration requirements, such as [[.abogado]], also note this restricted intent.<ref>[https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1731 PIC Download, gTLDresult.ICANN.org] Retrieved 12 Mar 2013</ref>
===$15mm Auction Funding===
===$15mm Auction Funding===