|
|
| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
|
| |
|
| <table cellspacing="0"><tr><td style="vertical-align:top;background-color:#f5faff;border:1px solid #DDD;padding:7px 7px 7px 7px;" vertical-align="top"> | | <table cellspacing="0"><tr><td style="vertical-align:top;background-color:#f5faff;border:1px solid #DDD;padding:7px 7px 7px 7px;" vertical-align="top"> |
| <div style="margin:0;background:#cedff2;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:120%;font-weight:bold;border:1px solid #DDD;text-align:left;color:#000;padding-left:0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;padding-bottom:0.2em;">Hot Topics: [[gTLD#Closed Generic Strings|Closed gTLDs]] & [[PIC]]s</div> | | <div style="margin:0;background:#cedff2;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:120%;font-weight:bold;border:1px solid #DDD;text-align:left;color:#000;padding-left:0.4em;padding-top:0.2em;padding-bottom:0.2em;">In the News: [[Independent Objector|The Independent Objector]]</div> |
| After ICANN published information on its 1,930 applications it was immediately noted that some companies had applied for a number of generic terms relevant to their business, writing in their applications that they intended to be the sole registrant for the TLD. There was no [[Brand TLD]] distinction in this round, though there were guesses that ICANN would create rules for such TLDs in any future round. Thus, the closed generic terms violated no rules as developed through the [[GNSO]] process and as included in the Applicant Guidebook. Some noted that this was in fact an intentional byproduct of the program that had been considered while others disagreed.
| | <center>'''The [[Independent Objector]] has filed Community Objections against the following applications:''' |
| | | [[.amazon]] - [[Amazon]]<br> |
| The largest applicant for closed gTLDs is [[Amazon]], and many worried that their applications to control a large number of generic terms would result in them circumnavigating traditional navigation for shopping online and give them an unfair competitive advantage. Another notable applicants with multiple applications for closed generic terms include [[L'Oréal]] and [[Google]]. In late 2012, Amazon and other companies that applied for closed-generic strings received a [[GAC]] Early Warning from GAC Chair, [[Heather Dryden]]...''[[gTLD#Closed Generic Strings|Full Summary of Closed gTLDs]]''
| | [[.アマゾン]] - [[Amazon]]<br> |
| <center><big>'''[[Google#New gTLDs#Applications|See Google's Full List of Applications]]'''</big></center> | | [[.亚马逊]] - [[Amazon]]<br> |
| <center><big>'''[[Amazon#ICANN & New gTLDs|See Amazon's Full List of Applications]]'''</big></center> | | [[.charity]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.charity]] - [[Famous Four Media]]<br> |
| | [[.healthcare]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.hospital]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.indians]] - [[Reliance Industries Limited]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[Google]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[Medistry LLC]]<br> |
| | [[.medical]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.patagonia]] - [[Patagonia]]</center> |
| <br> | | <br> |
| '''[[PIC|Public Interest Commitments]]''' (or PICs) is a term and creation directly from [[ICANN]], first suggested on February 5th, 2013, as related to [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD applicants]] and the [[Registry Agreement]] they are to sign. They were part of a revised new registry agreement, which has been widely maligned, that ICANN opened for public comments. 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. As is, 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..''[[PIC|Read more on PICs]]'' | | <center>'''The [[Independent Objector]] has filed Limited Public Interest Objections against the following applications:''' |
| <center><big>'''[[PIC#PICs Submitted|See List with Download Links for PICs submitted]]'''</big></center> | | [[.health]] - [[Afilias]]<br> |
| | | [[.health]] - [[Famous Four Media]]<br> |
| | | [[.health]] - [[DotHealth, LLC]]<br> |
| | [[.health]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.healthcare]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.hospital]] - [[Donuts]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[Google]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[DocCheck AG]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[HEXAP SAS]]<br> |
| | [[.med]] - [[Medistry LLC]]<br> |
| | [[.medical]] - [[Donuts]]</center> |
| </td> | | </td> |
| <td rowspan="3" style="width:8px;"></td> | | <td rowspan="3" style="width:8px;"></td> |
