Jump to content

.doctor: Difference between revisions

From ICANNWiki
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
Vivian (talk | contribs)
staff
8,858 edits
No edit summary
Line 27: Line 27:
===Radix===
===Radix===
Radix received a [[GAC]] Early Warning as an entire applicant, where each one of the applicants was flagged by the U.S. Government. This seems to be the only time a portfolio applicant had all of their applications warned. The issue does not deal with the technical capabilities or thematic content of their applications, but rather the inclusion of an email address associated with the US' Federal Bureau of Investigation. It seems that Radix included correspondence with this address as a recommendation with each of their applications.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/RadixReg-US-31.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353452704000 RadixReg. GACweb.ICANN.org] Retrieved 27 Nov 2012</ref>
Radix received a [[GAC]] Early Warning as an entire applicant, where each one of the applicants was flagged by the U.S. Government. This seems to be the only time a portfolio applicant had all of their applications warned. The issue does not deal with the technical capabilities or thematic content of their applications, but rather the inclusion of an email address associated with the US' Federal Bureau of Investigation. It seems that Radix included correspondence with this address as a recommendation with each of their applications.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/RadixReg-US-31.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353452704000 RadixReg. GACweb.ICANN.org] Retrieved 27 Nov 2012</ref>
===European Commission Objection===
===European Commission Communiqué===
The [[European Commission]] objected to both application for .doctor outside of ICANN's defined remediation processes.
The [[European Commission]] flagged both applications for .doctor outside of ICANN's defined remediation processes.


Just after [[ICANN]]'s [[GAC]] issued its Early Warnings, which are advice given from one GAC member country to an applicant warning it of potential issues within its application, the [[European Commission]] issued a letter to all applicants within the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]]. The letter highlights 58 applications that "could raise issues of compatibility with the existing legislation .. and/or with policy positions and objectives of the European Union." It notes a desire to open a dialogue with each offending applicant.
Just after [[ICANN]]'s [[GAC]] issued its Early Warnings, which are advice given from one GAC member country to an applicant warning it of potential issues within its application, the [[European Commission]] issued a letter to all applicants within the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]]. The letter highlights 58 applications that "could raise issues of compatibility with the existing legislation .. and/or with policy positions and objectives of the European Union." It notes a desire to open a dialogue with each offending applicant.


The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/20121127093808906.pdf DomainIncite.com/Docs] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref><ref>[http://domainincite.com/11130-europe-rejects-icanns-authority-as-it-warns-of-problems-with-58-new-gtlds Europe Rejects ICANNs Authority As it Warns of Problems with 58 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref>
The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/20121127093808906.pdf DomainIncite.com/Docs] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref><ref>[http://domainincite.com/11130-europe-rejects-icanns-authority-as-it-warns-of-problems-with-58-new-gtlds Europe Rejects ICANNs Authority As it Warns of Problems with 58 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com] Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012</ref>
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 15:09, 11 January 2013

Status: Proposed
Type: Generic
Category: Health
More information:

.doctor is a proposed new TLD in ICANN's New gTLD Program.

Applicants[edit | edit source]

  1. Radix (DotMedico TLD Inc.), .doctor is one of 31 applications submitted by the company, which has chosen ARI Registry Services as its backend technical provider.[1]
  2. Donuts (Brice Trail, LLC)- This is one of the companies created by Donuts, which applied for 307 new gTLDs under different company names. The company invested $56 million in application fees alone. Daniel Schindler, co-founder and EVP for Marketing and Sales, is the primary contact person in the application. [2]
  3. The Medical Registry Limited -the contact person in the application is Mr. Sloan Daniel Gaon.

GAC Early Warnings[edit | edit source]

Donuts[edit | edit source]

The application for .doctor from Donuts 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 notes that the TLD refers to a regulated market though Donuts did not include sufficient mechanisms to prevent consumer harm in its application.[4] None of the other two applicants received a GAC Early Warning.

Radix[edit | edit source]

Radix received a GAC Early Warning as an entire applicant, where each one of the applicants was flagged by the U.S. Government. This seems to be the only time a portfolio applicant had all of their applications warned. The issue does not deal with the technical capabilities or thematic content of their applications, but rather the inclusion of an email address associated with the US' Federal Bureau of Investigation. It seems that Radix included correspondence with this address as a recommendation with each of their applications.[5]

European Commission Communiqué[edit | edit source]

The European Commission flagged both applications for .doctor outside of ICANN's defined remediation processes.

Just after ICANN's GAC issued its Early Warnings, which are advice given from one GAC member country to an applicant warning it of potential issues within its application, the European Commission issued a letter to all applicants within the new gTLD program. The letter highlights 58 applications that "could raise issues of compatibility with the existing legislation .. and/or with policy positions and objectives of the European Union." It notes a desire to open a dialogue with each offending applicant.

The Commission specifically notes that this objection is not a part of the GAC Early Warning process, and goes on to note that "the Commission does not consider itself legally bound to [ICANN] processes," given that there is not legal agreement between the two bodies.[6][7]

References[edit | edit source]

Governmental Advisory Committee. Considers and provides advice on the activities of ICANN as they relate to concerns of governments, particularly matters where there may be an interaction between ICANN's policies and various laws and international agreements or where they may affect public policy issues (ICANN Bylaws).

Retrieved from "https://icannwiki.org/index.php?title=.doctor&oldid=73439"