.eco

More information:

.eco, based in the United States, .ECO is owned and operated by planet .ECO LLC and Founded by two ecopreneurs

.eco domains have been registered over 3,000 times in 140 countries. Small business, professionals and non-profits use .eco domains to build their brands while creating a better future for the planet.

Search for and register .eco domains now at: www.ecodomains.org.

For more than a decade .ECO has been working with the internet and environmental communities to build .eco – an online home for businesses, non-profits and individuals working for an environmentally and socially sustainable world. More than 50 organizations support the .eco TLD. .eco Top Level Domain is backed by organizations including Conservation International, United Nations Global Compact, NRDC, Greenpeace and World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

Launch

The .eco domain was launched via a 60 day end date sunrise for registrants of ICANN's Trademark Clearinghouse, followed by a two week quiet period.

Public launch began with a 7 day early access period, followed by general availability.

Key launch dates:

• February 1 - April 2, 2017 - Sunrise (end-date)
• April 18 - 25, 2017 - Early Access Program
• April 25, 2017 - General Availability

Domain Granting Program

In September 2016, Big Room announced that it would be granting up to 500 domains to the environmental community. The grants would form a permanent reserved list of domains only accessible to environmental non-profits.

Over 350 organizations from 50 countries expressed their views on what names should be reserved for community use. This was the first ever program of this kind.

Contention History

Original Applicants

1. planet.ECO LLC - the exclusive registrant of .ECO®, is a US-based Small Business, (SBA-SDB)

2. Donuts (Little Birch, LLC) - one of 307 gTLD applications submitted by the company. This applicant submitted a Public Interest Commitment, which can be downloaded here.

3. Big Room Inc. - The only community-priority application. This applicant submitted a Public Interest Commitment, which can be downloaded here.

4. Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd. (TLDH) - one of 68 gTLD applications submitted by the company. This applicant submitted a Public Interest Commitment, which can be downloaded here.

Contention

.eco was one of the most publicly contested gTLD applications. By early 2009 Big Room Inc. and Dot Eco LLC had declared their intent to apply for .eco. Dot Eco LLC was endorsed by Al Gore, the Alliance for Climate Protection, the Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation, but eventually chose not to seek community status. Big Room Inc., applying via a Community Priority Mechanism it co-created, was initially endorsed by Green Cross International and WWF International.

In August 2009, Dot Eco LLC released a 'green paper' critiquing Big Room's approach and suggesting an investigation due to conflict of interest. Big Room did not respond to the critique other than that it was 'unfortunate'. Media characterization of the conflict generated significant press coverage, ranging from the New York Times to the Financial Times. Following this, in 2011, Al Gore withdrew support for Dot Eco LLC. A spokesman explained that they had decided to focus on global climate issues. Despite losing Gore's support, Dot Eco LLC maintained its intention to submit a .eco application. TLDH eventually acquired Dot Eco LLC and then applied for .eco without requesting community priority.

In the interim, Big Room's proposal had gathered the support of more than 50 of the world's leading environmental organizations, including UN Environment, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, WWF, Greenpeace, and many others. Big Room Inc. co-founders, formerly employed by the UN, and these groups had collaborated independently on developing a unified vision, led by Big Room Inc., for how .eco could support the interests of their intended community. This vision formed the backbone of the community priority section of Big Room's .eco application and was used in the consideration to designate .eco for delegation approval.

In 2012 it was revealed that four companies applied to obtain rights to operate the .eco registry - planet .ECO, Donuts, Big Room Inc. and TLDH. Of these, only Big Room, who began applying for the .eco community, since 2007, according to cc-founder Jacob Malthouse, sought community designation. 7 years later, all applicants passed initial financial, technical and operational evaluation, except for planet .ECO, which small business was required to provide evidence of $10,800,000 in continuing operating instrument in order to pass. planet .ECO then sought extended evaluation, met the new requirement and passed.. planet .ECO then filed a limited rights objection against TLDH, which failed. Big Room Inc.'s co-created community priority was regarded superior to planet .ECO's nationwide trademark priority and passed.

Donuts and TLDH then filed a reconsideration request, in part citing discrimination of the ICANN Board, attempting to reverse this decision. The Board rejected the request. The rejection was then appealed to an independent panel, which also rejected the attempt. No applicant contested the ICANN Board's adoption of the panel's decision.

planet .ECO operates the .ECO registry.

planet .ECO and predecessor Trademark Litigation

Separate to the .eco gTLD application contention, planet .ECO filed a trademark infringement case against Big Room Inc. and Dot Eco LLC on March 2, 2012 in Los Angeles District Court. The complainant asked the court to order Big Room and Dot Eco LLC to stop infringing on their mark and force plaintiffs to withdraw their .eco gTLD applications. Dot Eco LLC responded to the complaint with an argument that the trademark was obtained illegally by planet .ECO and that it should therefore be cancelled by the court. Big Room, with an office in Connecticut, filed a motion to dismiss because of lack of jurisdiction that was granted. planet .ECO and Dot Eco LLC mutually withdrew and tolled their case against each other.. Subsequent to this litigation, six cancellation actions have been commenced against the planet .ECO mark. planet .ECO prevailed in all cases and two were Dismiss with Prejudice.

European Commission Communiqué to ICANN

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. Big Room entered into a dialogue and as a result of those conversations - and in dialogue with the environmental community - updated its PIC spec to include specific references to issues raised by the Commission. The Commission specifically noted 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.

Economic Cooperation Organization Complaint to ICANN

An international governmental organization, the Economic Cooperation Organization, sent a letter of complaint to ICANN in February 2013 given that they use the 'eco' acronym for their work. In its letter the ECO states that it “expresses its disapproval and non-endorsement to all the applications for the .eco gTLD and requests the ICANN and the new gTLD application evaluators to not approve these applications.”. However, neither the Economic Cooperation Organization nor any of its member states objected to any .eco application via the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee or as part of the new gTLD program. ICANN did not therefore act on this request, since it was not made through the organization's multi-stakeholder process.

planet .ECO Legal Rights Objection Against Top Level Domain Holdings

A Legal Rights Objection was filed by the applicant planet.ECO, LLC, against applicant Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd.. A Legal Rights Objection, as defined by the ICANN approved mediator, WIPO, is when, "third parties may file a formal objection to an application on several grounds, including, for trademark owners and Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) [..] When such an objection is filed, an independent panel (comprised of one or three experts) will determine whether the applicant’s potential use of the applied-for gTLD would be likely to infringe [..] the objector’s existing trademark, or IGO name or acronym." The objection was rejected by a WIPO panelist on August 26, 2013. See: Expert Objection Legal Rights Determination PDF . The Determination noted: "The Panel is mindful that...The Panel is not a court of law; its ‘jurisdiction’ is limited”.

Big Room Inc. Community Priority Evaluation

On 6 October 2014 the Economist Intelligence Unit, ICANN's community priority evaluator, announced Big Room Inc.'s .eco application priority, scoring the application 14/16 points. In its evaluation the evaluation panel noted:

The pursuits of the .ECO community as defined in the application has awareness and recognition of a community among its members. This is because the community is defined in terms of its association with, and active participation in, environmental activities.

Its members are actively committed to environmental causes, such as sustainable use of the environment and environmental conservation and preservation. 

Donuts and TLDH use of ICANN Accountability Mechanisms

On October 24, 2014, approximately 2 weeks after passing the community priority evaluation, the contention set status was changed to "on-hold" pending the resolution of ICANN accountability mechanisms, including a reconsideration request submitted by Little Birch, LLC (Donuts) and Minds + Machines Group Limited (née Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd). On 18 November 2014 the ICANN Board issued a final determination denying this reconsideration request.

On February 20, 2015 Big Room Inc. also submitted a reconsideration request to ICANN pertaining to delays associated with the Cooperative Engagement Process. The request stated: "Big Room Inc. (“Big Room”) respectfully requests Board reconsideration of ICANN staff inaction in connection with its failure to terminate the ongoing Cooperative Engagement Process (“CEP”) pertaining to the .ECO generic top-level domain (gTLD) subject matter." The request was withdrawn prior to ICANN Board consideration of the matter as a result of the CEP being terminated.

Subsequently, an independent review panel was convened to consider whether the ICANN Board Governance Committee acted appropriately in issuing a final determination denying Little Birch, LLC and Minds + Machines Group Limited's reconsideration request.

A hearing was held on December 7 2015. A final declaration was issued on February 12 2016 . The determination upheld Big Room's .eco application CPE evaluation result, noting: "And, "[a]s for the .eco IRP, it is clear that the Reconsideration Request [14-46] was misconceived and was little more than an attempt to appeal the CPE decision. Again, therefore, the .eco IRP was always going to fail." (Final Declaration at ¶ 156.)".

The ICANN Board adopted the final declaration March 10 2016 .

Conclusion

No evidence of the .eco gTLD Delegation exist:

• Delegation record: https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/eco.html - provides evidence of designation but not the delegation.

• Registry agreement: https://www.icann.org/resources/agreement/eco-2016-07-08-en - is contractually required in accordance with May 31, 2012 Solicitation Number: SA1301-12-RP-0043, Incorporated by reference into July 2, 2012 Federal Contract SA1301-12-CN-0035 for delegation request of .eco.

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).

World Intellectual Property Organization

Independent Review Process