.hotels: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Dustin Loup (talk | contribs) updating auction details |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|language = | |language = | ||
|translation = | |translation = | ||
|registryprovider = | |registryprovider =[[Neustar]] | ||
|registrations = | |registrations = | ||
|date = | |date = | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
|category = [[:Category:Industry New gTLDs|Industry]] | |category = [[:Category:Industry New gTLDs|Industry]] | ||
|community = | |community = | ||
|priority = 340 - [[Booking.com]] | |||
|keypeople = | |keypeople = | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 19: | Line 20: | ||
The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition, which is made up of over 25,000 hotels in over 100 countries, including many major brands, has filed complaints against .hotels, as well as six of the seven [[.hotel]] applications, and the applications for [[.hoteis]] and [[.hoteles]]. They support the .hotel application submitted by [[HOTEL Top-Level-Domain S.a.r.l]], and urge the [[Independent Objector]] to object to the other applications on community grounds. If this does not occur, they plan to file their own [[Community Objection]]s.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10101-big-hotel-chains-pick-a-side-in-hotel-gtld-fight Big hotel chains pick a side in .hotel gTLD fight, domainincite.com]</ref> | The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition, which is made up of over 25,000 hotels in over 100 countries, including many major brands, has filed complaints against .hotels, as well as six of the seven [[.hotel]] applications, and the applications for [[.hoteis]] and [[.hoteles]]. They support the .hotel application submitted by [[HOTEL Top-Level-Domain S.a.r.l]], and urge the [[Independent Objector]] to object to the other applications on community grounds. If this does not occur, they plan to file their own [[Community Objection]]s.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10101-big-hotel-chains-pick-a-side-in-hotel-gtld-fight Big hotel chains pick a side in .hotel gTLD fight, domainincite.com]</ref> | ||
The application was issued a [[GAC]] Early Warning from the representative of Australia and GAC Chair, [[Heather Dryden]]. The warning system is noted as a strong recommendation on behalf of national governments to the [[ICANN Board]] that a given TLD application should be denied as it stands. Applicants are encouraged to work with objecting GAC members.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/gac-early-warning GAC Early Warning, NewgTLDS.ICANN.org] Retrieved 26 Nov 2012</ref> | |||
The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/Hotels-AU-75482.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353451686000 Hotels AU, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref> | |||
==String Similarity== | |||
In late February 2013, the [[String Similarity Panel]] (SSP) released a ruling, which revealed that '''.hotels''' and [[.hoteis]] had been deemed too similar and were placed in a contention set. Only one TLD can go on from a contention set to implementation, the others must be withdrawn or beat in auction or otherwise negotiated away from their application. The process of the String Similarity Panel was long obscured and had been causing a great deal of confusion and anxiety within the new TLD applicant community. Other than the .hotel/hoteis contention set there was only one other created, [[.unicom]] & [[.unicorn]]. There is no official appeals process to the findings of the Panel.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm Announcement 26Feb13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 27 Feb 2013</ref> | |||
===Appeal=== | |||
[[Booking.com]] filed an [[IRP]] on ICANN in late March 2014, appealing the decision of the [[String Similarity Panel|SSP]].<ref>[http://domainincite.com/16203-hotel-applicant-files-irp-on-icann Hotel Applicant Files IRP on ICANN]</ref> The appeal was not based a the merits of the SSP decision, but rather challenged that the ICANN Board of Directors acted outside of its bylaws by creating the arbitrary SSP system. In early March 2015 the IRP Panel ruled in favor of ICANN, but agreed that the SSP process is flawed and ordered ICANN to pay half of the panels cost.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/18097-icann-wins-hotels-hoteis-confusion-appeal-but-has-to-pay-up-anyway ICANN wins hotels/hoteis confusion]</ref> | |||
==ICANN Auction== | |||
The contention set including '''.hotels''' and [[.hoteis]] went to [[GTLD_Auctions#ICANN_Auctions|ICANN Auction]] on 18 November 2015. [[Booking.com]] won the auction with a winning bid of $2.2 million, earning them exclusive rights to the .hotels.<ref>[https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/auctionresults New gTLD Auction Results]</ref> | |||
==Community Objection== | |||
The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition filed a community objection against the application, as did HOTREC (Hotels, Restaurants & Cafés in Europe).<ref>[http://www.iccwbo.org/products-and-services/arbitration-and-adr/expertise/icann-new-gtld-dispute-resolution/pending-cases/ Pending Cases, ICCWBO.org] Retrieved 14 May 2013</ref> | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Latest revision as of 03:05, 20 November 2015
| Status: | Proposed |
| Registry Provider: | Neustar |
| Type: | Generic |
| Category: | Industry |
More information: 
| |
.hotels is a proposed TLD in ICANN's New gTLD Program. The applicant is Booking.com.[1]
The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition, which is made up of over 25,000 hotels in over 100 countries, including many major brands, has filed complaints against .hotels, as well as six of the seven .hotel applications, and the applications for .hoteis and .hoteles. They support the .hotel application submitted by HOTEL Top-Level-Domain S.a.r.l, and urge the Independent Objector to object to the other applications on community grounds. If this does not occur, they plan to file their own Community Objections.[2]
The application was issued a GAC Early Warning from the representative of Australia and GAC Chair, Heather Dryden. The warning system is noted as a strong recommendation on behalf of national governments to the ICANN Board that a given TLD application should be denied as it stands. Applicants are encouraged to work with objecting GAC members.[3]
The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.[4]
String Similarity[edit | edit source]
In late February 2013, the String Similarity Panel (SSP) released a ruling, which revealed that .hotels and .hoteis had been deemed too similar and were placed in a contention set. Only one TLD can go on from a contention set to implementation, the others must be withdrawn or beat in auction or otherwise negotiated away from their application. The process of the String Similarity Panel was long obscured and had been causing a great deal of confusion and anxiety within the new TLD applicant community. Other than the .hotel/hoteis contention set there was only one other created, .unicom & .unicorn. There is no official appeals process to the findings of the Panel.[5]
Appeal[edit | edit source]
Booking.com filed an IRP on ICANN in late March 2014, appealing the decision of the SSP.[6] The appeal was not based a the merits of the SSP decision, but rather challenged that the ICANN Board of Directors acted outside of its bylaws by creating the arbitrary SSP system. In early March 2015 the IRP Panel ruled in favor of ICANN, but agreed that the SSP process is flawed and ordered ICANN to pay half of the panels cost.[7]
ICANN Auction[edit | edit source]
The contention set including .hotels and .hoteis went to ICANN Auction on 18 November 2015. Booking.com won the auction with a winning bid of $2.2 million, earning them exclusive rights to the .hotels.[8]
Community Objection[edit | edit source]
The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition filed a community objection against the application, as did HOTREC (Hotels, Restaurants & Cafés in Europe).[9]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ Reveal Day 13 June 2012 – New gTLD Applied-For Strings
- ↑ Big hotel chains pick a side in .hotel gTLD fight, domainincite.com
- ↑ GAC Early Warning, NewgTLDS.ICANN.org Retrieved 26 Nov 2012
- ↑ Hotels AU, GACweb.ICANN.org
- ↑ Announcement 26Feb13, ICANN.org Retrieved 27 Feb 2013
- ↑ Hotel Applicant Files IRP on ICANN
- ↑ ICANN wins hotels/hoteis confusion
- ↑ New gTLD Auction Results
- ↑ Pending Cases, ICCWBO.org Retrieved 14 May 2013