9,082
edits
Changes
→The 2003 sTLD Application Process
<ref>[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/icann/pdfs/AppendixD_xxx.pdf Accountability
and
Transparency
at ICANN
: An
Independent
Review]</ref>
<ref>[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/icann/pdfs/AppendixD_xxx.pdf Accountability
and
Transparency
at ICANN
: An
Independent
Review]</ref>
===The 2003 sTLD Application Process===
===.xxx during the 2003 sTLD Application Process===
On December 15, 2003, the ICANN Board published a Request For Proposal (RFP) for new sTLDs after conducting public comments and extensive discussions within the different stakeholders within the ICANN community. ICM Registry submitted a proposal for.xxx on March 16 2004. IFFOR was named as the sponsoring organization, which will be responsible in developing policies for the proposed TLD. On August 2004, the [[IRP|Independent Review Panel]] evaluated ICM's application and reported to the [[ICANN Board]] that the the company failed to meet the baseline sponsorship criteria for sTLD.<ref>[http://www.iana.org/reports/2011/xxx-report-20110407.pdf Delegation of the .XXX top-level domain]</ref> Following the report, the ICANN Board approved a resolution allowing sTLD applicants to additional information to resolve the concerns raised by IRP in the report. On October 2004, ICM Registry started submitting additional documents to strengthen its application. ICM Registry was invited to make a presentation on April 3, 2005.<ref>[http://archive.icann.org/en/tlds/stld-apps-19mar04/stld-status-report.pdf Status Report on the sTLD Evaluation Process]</ref>
On December 15, 2003, the ICANN Board published a Request For Proposal (RFP) for new sTLDs after conducting public comments and extensive discussions within the different stakeholders within the ICANN community. ICM Registry submitted a proposal for.xxx on March 16 2004. IFFOR was named as the sponsoring organization, which will be responsible in developing policies for the proposed TLD. On August 2004, the [[IRP|Independent Review Panel]] evaluated ICM's application and reported to the [[ICANN Board]] that the the company failed to meet the baseline sponsorship criteria for sTLD.<ref>[http://www.iana.org/reports/2011/xxx-report-20110407.pdf Delegation of the .XXX top-level domain]</ref> Following the report, the ICANN Board approved a resolution allowing sTLD applicants to additional information to resolve the concerns raised by IRP in the report. On October 2004, ICM Registry started submitting additional documents to strengthen its application. ICM Registry was invited to make a presentation on April 3, 2005.<ref>[http://archive.icann.org/en/tlds/stld-apps-19mar04/stld-status-report.pdf Status Report on the sTLD Evaluation Process]</ref>