.eco: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
There has been early speculation by one academic that the creation of a .eco TLD, while potentially helping some ecological causes, could have the effect of "greenwashing" non-eco-friendly companies and efforts. Greenwashing is defined as companies making deceptive or misleading claims that their services and products are environmentally friendly.<ref>[http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/academic-sets-sights-eco-label-080457302.html Academic Sets Sights Eco Label, Au.Finance.Yahoo.com]</ref> That academic has stated that it is essential that ICANN award the dot eco bid with strong enviromental credentials and support to deter green washing. [https://twitter.com/#!/DrRimmer/status/167413957861195776] | There has been early speculation by one academic that the creation of a .eco TLD, while potentially helping some ecological causes, could have the effect of "greenwashing" non-eco-friendly companies and efforts. Greenwashing is defined as companies making deceptive or misleading claims that their services and products are environmentally friendly.<ref>[http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/academic-sets-sights-eco-label-080457302.html Academic Sets Sights Eco Label, Au.Finance.Yahoo.com]</ref> That academic has stated that it is essential that ICANN award the dot eco bid with strong enviromental credentials and support to deter green washing. [https://twitter.com/#!/DrRimmer/status/167413957861195776] | ||
==European Commission | ==European Commission Communiqué== | ||
The [[European Commission]] | The [[European Commission]] flagged all applications for .eco 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 15:10, 11 January 2013
Status: | Proposed |
Type: | Community gTLD Generic |
Category: | Industry |
Community: | Environmental community |
Priority #: | 156 - Donuts (Little Birch, LLC) 424 - Big Room Inc. 1475 - Top Level Domain Holdings 1798 - Planet Dot Eco, LLC |
More information: |
.eco is a proposed gTLD in ICANN's new gTLD program. The TLD is aimed at drawing attention to ecological/environmental causes and for organizations, their membership, businesses, products and other entities that want to associate themselves with ecology/the environment.
Current Applicants[edit | edit source]
- Big Room Inc. - Community-designated Application
- Donuts (Little Birch, LLC), one of 307 TLDs submitted by the company.
- Planet Dot Eco, LLC
- Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd., one of 68 applications submitted by the company on its own behalf.
Application Details[edit | edit source]
Big Room, Inc.[edit | edit source]
One public applicant, Big Room Inc., announced a partnership with Afilias for their back-end and technical needs, and has applied for .eco as a Community gTLD for the environmental community. They have been working with a Council of 12 environmental groups on a Policy Charter for .ECO since 2008. The Council is currently chaired by the World Wildlife Federation (WWF) International and Akatu Institute (Brazil). Other members include Greenpeace, Green Cross International, and Green Belt Movement International. In addition, over fifty other environmental groups, including 350.org, Ocean Conservancy, Amazon Watch and others support the effort, making it one of the largest environmental coalitions ever assembled. The Executive Directors of the United Nations Environment Programme and the United Nations Global Compact also included letters supporting a community-designated .eco domain and welcoming a multi-stakeholder approach to administering it on behalf of the environmental community.
The goal is to demonstrate the requisite community support and define a purpose and policies for .ECO for the greater good.[1]
An excerpt from its Community Priority Application: "In 2009, Big Room, itself a Certified B Corporation obliged to consider environmental, social and financial interests, launched an international multi-year stakeholder consultation process with the Community on the potential for .ECO to exist as a Community TLD. The process included 7 in-person consultations on 5 continents. Draft policies were published for 3 public comment periods of at least 30 days each...Since establishment, this international multi-stakeholder community council, made up of leading environmental organizations including WWF International, Greenpeace International, Green Cross International and others, has worked to define the mission, purpose and policies for a .ECO Community TLD that reflects the Community’s interests. The council’s work included 2 in-person meetings (Brussels ⁄ Washington, DC) and more than 20 conference calls between members. In September 2010, the council unanimously adopted a charter for the .ECO Community TLD - the .ECO Policy Consensus. The purpose and principles outlined in the .ECO Policy Consensus define what .ECO will mean as an active expression of the goals, values and interests of the Community. The Consensus has been reviewed and affirmed by the Big Room board of directors."
Eligibility for registration will largely depend on being able to furnish proof of membership to an environmental organization or the implementation of an environmental mission purpose.[2]
Early Contention[edit | edit source]
.eco was identified as a contentious TLD early on, with the main parties being Big Room Inc., and Dot Eco LLC.. Dot Eco LLC was aligned with former Vice-President of the USA, Al Gore, and the Alliance for Climate Protection, the Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation. Big Room Inc. was, at that time, largely associated with Mikhail Gorbachev, the Russian ex-president, Green Cross International and WWF International. In August 2009, Dot Eco LLC released a 'green paper' critiquing Big Room Inc.'s approach. Big Room did not respond to the critique other than that it was 'unfortunate'. [3]
On September 28, 2011, Al Gore's organization, the Climate Reality project dropped its support to the Dot Eco LLC bid to give way to the application of Big Room Inc., which is supported by Michael Gorbachev's Green Cross International. A spokesman from Gore's camp explained that Climate Reality as a non-profit organization has limited resources and they decided to focus their campaign on global climate issues. [4] Despite losing Gore's support, Minds + Machines announced its intentions to apply for a .eco TLD whether they would do that under their own name or through a client or separate company was initially unclear.[5]
Top Level Domains Holding Ltd., the parent company of Minds + Machines which held 25% stake on Dot Eco LLC, confirmed that the company will apply for the .eco gTLD. Peter Dengate Thrush, Executive Chairman of Top Level Domains Holding said,"...We believe the Dot Eco LLC consortium is exceptionally well placed to compete in every respect of its .eco application and run that gTLD in a meaningful manner. We are therefore delighted to continue give it our full infrastructural and financial support." [6] However, they did not apply through the Dot Eco LLC venture, but instead applied on their own behalf.[7] Antony Van Couvering previously stated that applying for a community gTLD is too risky. He believes that the .eco TLD will not pass ICANN's Community Priority Evaluation, which means the company's application for .eco TLD will not be under community gTLD category.[8]
Planet Dot Eco, LLC, a company based in Connecticut and trademark holder of .eco and a possible applicant for the .eco string filed an infringement case against Big Room Inc. and Dot Eco LLC on March 2, 2012. The complainant asked the court to order Big Room and Dot Eco LLC to stop submitting further documentation and withdraw their application for the .eco string with ICANN. Dot Eco LLC responded to the complaint with an argument that the trademark was obtained illegally by Planet.eco and it should be cancelled by the court. Dot Eco also argued that the complainant is is trying to prevent competition. On the other hand, Big Room filed a motion to dismiss because of lack of jurisdiction. [9] [10] [11]
Little Birch, LLC Donuts also applied for the string. Donuts is a start-up company that applied for 307 new gTLDs, each under different company names. The company is backed by large venture capitalists and spent $56 million just for applications fees. Daniel Schindler, co-founder and EVP of Marketing and Sales of Donuts is the main contact person. . [12]
Early Criticism[edit | edit source]
There has been early speculation by one academic that the creation of a .eco TLD, while potentially helping some ecological causes, could have the effect of "greenwashing" non-eco-friendly companies and efforts. Greenwashing is defined as companies making deceptive or misleading claims that their services and products are environmentally friendly.[13] That academic has stated that it is essential that ICANN award the dot eco bid with strong enviromental credentials and support to deter green washing. [2]
European Commission Communiqué[edit | edit source]
The European Commission flagged all applications for .eco 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.[14][15]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ [1]
- ↑ Application 1-912-59314
- ↑ Green Domain Sparks War of Words, BBCNews.com
- ↑ Al Gore Mikhail Gorbachev Control Eco Domain, BusinessGreen.com
- ↑ Dot Eco, MindsAndMachines.com
- ↑ Top Level Domain Hdg. Dot Eco LLC will apply for .eco gTLD
- ↑ Application Status, gTLDResult.ICANN.org
- ↑ Will Anyone Qualify As a Community TLD?
- ↑ Planet.Eco LLC v. Big Room Inc. et al
- ↑ AS GTLD WINDOW CLOSES, LEGAL DISPUTES HEAT UP: RIVAL.ECO APPLICANTS SPAR IN CALIFORNIA
- ↑ Three-way legal fight over .eco breaks out
- ↑ Donuts Inc eye popping list of 307 new top-level domains
- ↑ Academic Sets Sights Eco Label, Au.Finance.Yahoo.com
- ↑ DomainIncite.com/Docs Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012
- ↑ Europe Rejects ICANNs Authority As it Warns of Problems with 58 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com Published 27 Nov 2012, Retrieved 11 Dec 2012