New gTLD Program

The New gTLD Program is a current program to add an unlimited number of new gTLDs to the root zone. The program's goal is to enhance competition, innovation, and consumer choice. The first application round started on January 12th, 2012, and ended on April 20th, 2012, during which time applicants applied via the TLD Application System (TAS) to run the registry for the TLD that they choose. The application window was supposed to close on April 12th, but due to a glitch in the TAS system the system was shut down for a period of time before it reopened for a one week window to allow applicants to finish using the system.

In April 2012, after closure of registration for the ICANN New gTLD Program, it was revealed that there were 1,268 applicants in the program. On June, 13th ("Reveal Day"), it was announced that there were 1,930 applications: 84 of these were community applications, 116 are for IDNs, and 230 of the applications have one or more applicant and will thus go through string contention processes. This means the first round of the new gTLD program could create a maximum of 1,409 new TLDs.

See complete lists of:
All New gTLD Applications —Generic Applications — Geographic Applications — Brand Applications — IDN Applications

Overview

The different types of new gTLD applications:

• Standard or Generic TLD - under this type of application, the proposed new gTLD is open to the public for registration. The string does not have any restriction. These are mostly generic terms, though some applications for generic terms, most notably by Amazon and Google propose restricting the use of the TLD to solely corporate purposes
• Community TLD - the proposed new gTLDs under this application are restricted to a specific community with high degree of social awareness. The application should be strongly supported by the community. Examples of community TLDs include: .catholic, .thai, .aarp
• Geographical TLD - This type of application represents a particular city or region; support of the local government is required for these TLDs, examples include: .nyc, .berlin, .tokyo
• Brand TLD - companies and organizations will be able to apply for their own TLDs using their brand names and trademarks. For example: .unicef, .motorola, .hitachi, .deloitte

Historical Background

ICANN has been working on adding new extensions for years, and the current "new" gTLD program is actually the 4th round of gTLD expansion. The prior rounds were limited and specific: in 2000 there was a "proof of concept round", a round of sTLDs in 2003, and an ongoing process to introduce IDN ccTLDs. After the results of the 2000 and 2003 expansions of new gTLDs, a Policy Development Process in connection with the introduction of new gTLDs was developed by the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), which lasted from 2005 until 2007. During this Policy Development Process, the GNSO conducted extensive and detailed consultations with all constituencies within the ICANN global internet community. In 2008, 19 Specific Policy Recommendations were adopted by the ICANN Board for the implementation of new gTLDs, which describe the specifics of allocation and the contractual conditions. ICANN involved the global internet community in an open, inclusive and transparent implementation process to comment, review and provide their input toward creating the Applicant Guidebook for New gTLDs. The protection of intellectual property, community interests, consumer protection, and DNS stability were addressed during the process. Different versions and multiple drafts of the Applicant Guidebook were released in 2008. By June 2011, the ICANN Board launched the New gTLD Program, at the same time approving the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook. The Board announced the possibility of a 9th version of the Guidebook in January 2012, but the industry speculated that there was little chance that the changes would be more than clarification, as opposed to new rules and policies. The 9th version was released at the same time the application window opened, and as expected most of the changes were minor. One major change in the 9th version was greater power given to the Governmental Advisory Committee in forcing the ICANN Board to manually review any application that the GAC finds problematic. Exactly how many oppositions within the GAC would be necessary to cause Board consultation is vague, but it could be as few as one nation's objection. This change was made following a letter from U.S. Government Secretary Larry Strickling, which noted that the GAC would have the power to create new procedure after reviewing the entire pool of applications; that letter is further detailed below.

New gTLD Program Committee

On April 10, 2012, the ICANN Board established the New gTLD Program Committee, which shall be responsible for "all legal and decision making authority of the Board related to the new gTLD program" under its charter. However, other responsibilities related to the program that are prohibited from being delegated under Article XII, Section 2 of the ICANN Bylaws are excluded. The current members are:

• Cherine Chalaby (Chair)
• Fadi Chehade (Member)
• Chris Disspain (Member)
• Bill Graham (Member)
• Olga Madruga-Forti (Member)
• Erika Mann (Member)
• Gonzalo Navarro (Member)
• Ray Plzak (Member)
• George Sadowsky (Member)
• Michael Silber (Member)
• Kuo-Wei Wu (Member)
• Heather Dryden (Non Voting Liaison)
• Jonne Soininen (Non Voting Liaison)

New gTLD Roadshow

In order to draw awareness to the new gTLD program, ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom embarked on a world tour beginning in September, 2011 and concluding in December. The tour saw him personally visit 16 countries, while other staff and board members visited an additional 22 countries. The publicity was also picked up by major news outlets such as CNN, Al-Jazeera, the BBC, The New York Times, and others; some of the coverage of the roadshow was negative of the New gTLD Program. The roadshow was seen as a success by few outside of the actual organization, as many countries and corporations continued to misunderstand the program or know little to nothing about it at all. A letter sent by Larry Strickling, of the U.S. Department of Commerce, to ICANN Chair Steve Crocker a week prior to the gTLD program's launch in January, 2012, chastised ICANN's failure to educate major brands and concerned parties.

Application Process

Application System

Main article: TAS

Applicant Support Program

Main article: ASP

The Applicant Support Program (ASP) is a program that was conceptualized by the Joint Applicant Support Working Group (JASWG) in order to provide a discount for needy gTLD applicants to ensure worldwide accessibility and competition within the New gTLD Program. Acceptance to the program reduces the application fee from $185,000 to $47,000.

Entities interested in the ASP had three options:

1. Access to pro bono services for startup gTLD registries through the Applicant Support Directory- New gTLD applicants, particularly from developing countries, may avail financial and technical information or assistance from members of the ICANN community who provide financial or non-financial pro-bono services.
2. Apply for financial assistance- Reduced evaluation fees will be provided to qualified applicants
3. The Applicant Support Fund- A $2,000,000 seed fund has been set aside by ICANN to help needy applicants.

On February 3, 2012, ICANN announced that it was looking for volunteers to serve as members of the Support Applicant Review Panel (SARP), which was responsible for evaluating if a new gTLD applicant was qualified to avail financial assistance through the ASP.

The list of new gTLD Applicants who asked for assistance can be seen here.

Opening of Application Window

The Application System opened on schedule around midnight UTC on Thursday, January 12th, 2012. On January 19, 2012, just a week after ICANN opened the application window for new gTLDs, it reported that 25 companies had created accounts and registered for new gTLDs on the TAS system. This, however, does not indicate how many applications were filed, given that each TAS account can handle up to 50 separate applications. One company, Minds + Machines, disclosed that they had already registered for 20 extensions on behalf of their clients.

TAS Delays and Closing of the Application Window

On April 12, 2012, ICANN's Chief Operating Officer, Akram Atallah issued a statement, just hours before TAS was scheduled to close as per the set application window, acknowledging that a a possible glitch in the TLD application system software caused a limited number of users to see the file names and user names of other users. He said that ICANN decided to shut down the system until April 17 to protect applicants' information. Mr. Atallah also said that ICANN is investigating how the problem happened and that necessary measures would be undertaken to resolve the situation.

Following Atallah's statement, Kevin Murphy of DomainIncite reported that an applicant claimed that he noticed that a file from another applicant was attached to his application on April 6 and immediately reported the problem to ICANN. The applicant said, "I could infer the applicant/string… based on the name of the file." However the actual contents of the file were not visible. The TAS problem ignited different speculations and questions within the internet community, particularly the how long will TAS suffer from vulnerability, who among the applicants saw others applications and if some applicants took advantage of the situation and filed competing bids.

On April 14, 2012, ICANN issued another statement related to the TAS problem. The internet governing body identified that a report on March 19 was the only incident related to the technical glitch.

ICANN continue to delay the opening of TAS, with little explanation, and first noted that it would continue to be unavailable until April 20th.

Apart from the extension of the application window, ICANN also informed journalists that the problem was not caused by a cyber attack, no application data was lost and the TAS system is expected to open soon.

On April 23, 2012, ICANN announced that it was able to identify all applicants affected by the TAS failure and the testing to fix the system is running smoothly. In addition, it also announced the postponement of the scheduled publication of all the applied new gTLD strings until April 30. Two days after, ICANN released an update informing applicants that the TAS will re-open on April 27. ICANN continuously provided update to the internet community regarding the progress of the testing to resolve the system. On April 27, the internet governing body reported that based on its analysis there are still limited number of affected applicants and tests to improve the system are being conducted continuously. ICANN again delayed the opening of the TAS system but promised to continue to provide updates.

On April 30, 2012, ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom stated that he is hoping that the technical failure will be fixed before his term expired and he passes the job to his successor during the ICANN 44 meeting, which was to be held in Prague on June 29, 2012. He said, "I’d like to see us obviously get the technical issues resolved, notify applicants, reopen the window and publish the strings before I pass the baton in Prague. That’s not a commitment at this point in time, it’s an indication as CEO that it’s absolutely my intention to push for a timely resolution of this issue… If we can get things done sooner, then the sooner the better."

On May 2, 2012, ICANN reported that there were 1268 registered users and around 95,000 file attachments were available when the system went offline. It estimated 455 incidents wherein a file name and user name was possibly seen by another applicant. It also identified that the file names and user names of 105 applicants were viewed by another applicant and 50 applicants possibly viewed the file names and user names of one or more applicants. ICANN assured the internet community that it was continuously working on improving the system to fix the technical problem. On May 4, ICANN informed that it received approximately $350 million dollars in application fees and the payments from 214 potential applicants registered before the March 29 cut had yet to be received. In addition, the internet governing body also reported that notifications were being sent to applicants informing them if they were affected by the software. The notification process was expected to be completed by May 8 and the schedule to re-open the TAS to be announced thereafter.

ICANN re-opened the TLD Application System on May 21. TAS was down for a total of 40 days; the length of this downtime has been criticized by ICANN's detractors and supporters alike. All applicants were able to log in, review and submit their applications until May 30, 2012.

Reveal Day and Aftermath

It was discovered post-Reveal Day that several applicants had made mistakes in their applications. As a response to requests for a way to make changes to submitted applications, ICANN developed New gTLD Application Change Request Process and Criteria. Requests were submitted through the New gTLD Customer Service Center (CSC), and ICANN will compare the request against the following 7 criteria:

1. Explanation – Is a reasonable explanation provided?
2. Evidence that original submission was in error – Is there anything to indicate that the change merely corrects an error, as claimed?
3. Other third parties affected – Does the change affect other third parties materially?
4. Precedents – Is the change similar to others that have already been approved? Could the change lead others to request similar changes that could affect third parties or result in undesirable effects on the program?
5. Fairness to applicants – Would allowing the change be construed as fair to the general community? Would disallowing the change be construed as unfair?
6. Materiality – Would the change affect the evaluation score or require re-evaluation of some or all of the application? Would the change affect string contention or community priority consideration?
7. Timing – Does the timing interfere with the evaluation process in some way?

Depending on the results of this comparison, the request will either be approved or denied, and the applicant will be notified. All applications that have been approved for change will have their changes listed on the new gTLD microsite and the application will be held for at least 30 days before passing on to the next stage of the application process, so that the public may comment on whether a re-evaluation of the approval of the changes should be made. Any changes made to confidential portions of the application will be summarized and not posted, in order to protect the confidentiality of the applicant.

Batching/Drawing System

Main article: Batching

After the failed Digital Archery program, as a means to batch or meter the applications to proceed towards implementation at a rate of 1,000 new gTLDs per year, ICANN still needed a system. On October 10, 2012, ICANN announced that it had designed a metering program to determine the order in which applicants would proceed towards implementation, and it would be a manual draw. A chance-based process such as this had initially been avoided due to California's lottery laws, which apply to ICANN as it is headquartered in California. The organization applied for a non-profit, "fundraising" exemption permit in order to be allowed to run the lottery system. Lottery tickets cost $100. The number pulled in the draw determined the order in which applications proceeded, first with the release of their Initial Evaluation, and then with their potential contention or formal objections, GAC or otherwise. Applicants that pass the Initial Evaluation and have no other outstanding issues can elect to go directly on to signing the general Registry Agreement, or to negotiate a different agreement with ICANN. The lottery was held in mid-December, 2012.

Delegation

ICANN estimated that the new drawing/lottery system should speed up the implementation of new gTLDs, with delegation estimated to begin in the second quarter of 2013, rather than the earlier estimate of the fourth quarter of 2013/first quarter of 2014. Initial evaluation results will be released at a rate of about 150 per week starting in March, 2013. Contracts and pre-delegation testing will be done at a rate of about 20 per week, which allows for about 1,000 new gTLDs to be introduced in any given year. IDN new gTLD applications will be given priority in the process, which ICANN has explained to be in the interest of better diversifying the Internet internationally.

Initial Evaluation Results

On March 22nd 2013, ICANN announced the first 27 strings to be evaluated as "passing" Initial Evaluation. ICANN published a press release on August 30th, 2013 stating that a major milestone had been reached and announced that the new gTLD initial evaluations had concluded. The press release stated: "Out of the 1,930 new gTLD applications submitted, a total of 1,745 applications passed Initial Evaluation, 32 have gone into Extended Evaluation, and 121 were withdrawn from the program."

Further Developments

At ICANN 45 in Toronto, Canada, in October 2012, Kurt Pritz provided some updates on the new gTLD program.

• GAC Early Warnings should be expected shortly after the close of the meeting.
• No contracts or delegations will be made before the next ICANN meeting, in Beijing.
• Seven applicants have withdrawn their applications, zero objections have been filed in the objection process, and there have been 127 change requests. Of those change requests, 29 have been approved, 84 are in review, and 14 require follow-up with applicants.
• String similarity will be analyzed in November.
• The geographic names review was currently being analyzed, and announcements were expected on November 26th.
• The Clarifying Questions test pilot had been run, with questions and survey having been sent on August 31 to various applicants, and responses due on September 17. The following stats were received: 72 percent of the respondents said the 6000 character limit was enough to answer the questions; more than half of respondents, 61 percent, said the financial and technical CQs were clear; some of the feedback included using bullet points instead of paragraphs, and for ICANN to disclose current scores and provide sample LOC and answers that meet requirements; and more than half said that two weeks was not enough time to respond to the CQs.
• Applicants to the Applicant Support Program were currently being analyzed by a five-member panel.
• EBERO, the emergency back-end registry operator, was currently being developed by ICANN. They are planning for there to be three or four EBEROs to represent North America, Europe and Asia.

The most notable failure to hold to these points was delaying the release of the String Similarity Panel until March 1st. This caused anxiety given that ICANN was unable to produce a clear rubric for how strings are being categorized as similar, and also given the fact that the ruling of the String Similarity Panel is final with no appeals process built-in.

Closed Generic Strings

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.

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 portfolio client with multiple applications for closed generic terms is L'Oréal. In late 2012, Amazon and other companies that applied for closed-generic strings received a GAC Early Warning from GAC Chair, Heather Dryden. The early warning system is the work of an individual GAC member but signals that the larger GAC organization may later issue official advice recommending the rejection of the TLD application as-is by the ICANN Board. Those applicants that receive warnings are encouraged to work with the objecting representative. The German representative also raised issues with regards to closed generics.

Following further questions ICANN's New gTLD Program Committee looked at the issue. Information on their January meeting that was released in February 2013 shows that they were unclear how to even define a closed generic, what are the common attributes, what an appropriate remediation strategy would be, and further note that there is no violation taking place between the applications and the Applicant Guidebook, and they therefore have no room to comment or change policy without further direction from a policy development process started in the GNSO. Still, they opened up a public comment period on February 5th, 2013, to ascertain opinions on what a closed generic is, and what are the criteria for which a proposed registry can operate a "closed" or "open" string.

Objections to closed generics have come from Microsoft, who notes the danger they pose to competition on the Internet, and an online petition started by Tom Gilles of NewgTLDsite.com.

Technical Concerns Impede Delegation

ICANN hired firm Interisle Consulting to carry out an independent investigation on the issues that may arise from new gTLDs that are identical to TLDs being used on internal networks. The firm reported at ICANN 47 that .home and .corp gTLDs were cause for serious concern since those strings are widely in use by internal naming systems. In response to the report, ICANN labeled the .home and .corp strings as "high risk" and proposed that neither of the strings be delegated until it could be proven that risk is low. The report may also delay the delegation and implementation of many of the gTLD applications until risks have been managed.

Opposition

A number of high profile opponents came out against ICANN and its new gTLD program, including: Association of National Advertisers (ANA), the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA), the Coalition for Responsible Internet Domain Oversight (CRIDO), the National Retail Federation, and others. Major corporations involved with these organizations include: Adidas, Dell, Toyota, Wal-Mart, Kraft Foods, and other prominent American and internationally known brands. ICANN's new gTLD program also recieved negative Op-Eds by the editorial boards of the New York Times and Washington Post. ICANN was also the subject of the hearings within the U.S. Congress, detailed below, and consequently received letters from Senators and Congressmen asking them to delay or reevaluate the program. Other government criticism included a petition for delay by the FTC. Many of these critics were not explicitly anti-ICANN, but anti-new gTLDs. The most common complaint came from trademark owners and their lobbying groups, who believed that the new program would create significant costs for them via defensive registrations without adding any value to their marketing and commercial outreach programs. However, some saw this as a result of miseducation given that many trademark protections are built into the new gTLD program. Other concerns, such as those from former ICANN Chair Esther Dyson, were focused on potential confusion for the end-user.

The complaints by ANA, The National Retail Federation, the U.S. Congress, the FTC, and other prominent groups resulted in many Internet commentators and journalists to come out against both ICANN and its new gTLD program. Examples of such material can be found here and here.

New gTLD Senate and House of Representatives Hearings

On December 8, 2011, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing, lobbied for by ANA, regarding to ICANN's new gTLD program. Speakers included Senior Vice President of ICANN, Kurt Pritz; Fiona Alexander, Associate Administrator of the Office of International Affairs at NTIA; Dan Jaffe, Executive Vice President of Government Relations for ANA; Esther Dyson, ICANN's Founding Chairwoman (1998-2000), speaking as an independent investor; and Senior Vice President and General Counsel of the YMCA Angela Williams, speaking on behalf of NPOC. Senate officials present included: Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV); Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn), Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash).

Sen. Rockefeller stated his support of the new gTLD program, claiming that he believed it was pro-competition and pro-innovation, but that the roll-out should be slower and more cautious. He cited the potential for fraud, consumer confusion, and cybersquatting as massive, requiring a phased implementation.

One of biggest concerns expressed was that companies, including not-for-profits, would have to spend a lot of money to prevent cybersquatting and typosquatting. Dyson argued that the new TLD program "create[s] opportunities for entrepreneurs but [doesn't] really create any value for the economy." Pritz explained that defensive registration will likely not be as necessary as companies believe, as many of the new TLDs will not be big or open enough for cybersquatters to take advantage. Additionally, several new trademark protections had been built into the expansion strategy, making the new TLDs better protected against cybersquatters than those currently available.

Sen. Ayotte expressed concerns that adding significantly more TLDs would create a challenge for law enforcement officials to police websites.

Another major concern, voiced by ANA, was that there was no consensus on the program, and that the date for the application period to open was arbitrary.

In a letter dated December 8th, the same day as the Senate hearing, twenty-eight domain name industry participants wrote to Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison to support the new gTLD program. They supported ICANN's argument that the program would be innovative and economically beneficial, and that the program had taken lots of people a long time to develop, hence it had not been rushed.

On December 14, a second hearing was held, hosted by the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee. Those speaking at this hearing were Fiona Alexander from NTIA, Dan Jaffe from ANA, Kurt Pritz from ICANN, Employ Media CEO Thomas Embrescia, and Joshua Bourne representing CADNA.

The result of the House hearing was the suggestion that the program be delayed until there is a consensus between all relevant stakeholders, made by Rep. Eshoo. Pritz and Alexander came to the defense of ICANN's Multistakeholder Model, arguing that the process had not been rushed. It had taken ICANN seven years to get to the point where all the issues had been discussed and no new issues were being raised, during which time they had consulted all the relevant stakeholders. Alexander made the point that "consensus" does not always mean "unanimity."

CADNA, a long-time opponent of the new gTLD program, reversed its opposition to the new gTLD program once the ICANN Board approved it. CADNA's focus shifted to addressing brand-owner concerns about the way that the program was rolled out. For example, Bourne praised .xxx's novel trademark protection mechanisms, saying they should be mandatory for all new gTLDs, and claimed that Congress could help in fighting cybersquatters by revising the old US Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. He did, however, request that ICANN announce dates for subsequent application rounds, in order to relieve the "condition of scarcity" that this uncertainty created.

The following week, the US Congress sent a letter addressed to ICANN President and CEO Rod Beckstrom and Board Chairman Steve Crocker, asking ICANN to delay the new gTLD program. The letter was signed by seventeen Congressmen, lead by Rep. Fred Upton. The letter cited their concern about the significant uncertainty about the process for businesses, non-profit organizations, and consumers. The suggested delay would serve to allow time for these groups to have their concerns alleviated.

There was also a letter sent by two Congressman, Bob Goodlatte and Howard Berman, to the Department of Commerce, in which they asked for a delay to the new gTLD program, and asked a number of questions on the Department's own preparedness and handling of the affair. They asked if ICANN is actually following its Affirmation of Commitments with the Department, and what the Department is doing to ensure that ICANN is following these commitments and protecting American businesses.

In response to all of this, Lawrence Strickling, of the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, sent a letter to ICANN chastising it for its poor outreach program and the confusion regarding its new gTLD program. In his letter, addressed to Chairman Steve Crocker, Mr. Strickling urged ICANN to more successfully showcase their new gTLD expansion program, and especially emphasize the number of built-in protections for trademark owners.

Mr. Strickling notes that NTIA has no plan or desire to actually interfere in the process after the 6 years of work and the imminent launch, but he does lament the number of problems that have been created largely by ICANN's poor outreach and education. NTIA identified 3 specific things to address: to educate trademark owners about measures in place allowing them to forego defensive registrations; to immediately implement consumer protections it has already devised; and to generally better educate all stakeholders. However, NTIA did suggest and open up the possibility of adding further protections once the application pool is closed and NTIA, alongside ICANN's GAC, had a chance to review the pool of applicants and reflect on what further steps could be taken in the second level. The full letter can be seen here.

China's Permit Requirement for All New gTLDs

In March, 2012, the Chinese government announced that it would require all gTLD applicants to apply and receive a permit from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology before applying to ICANN. Required information would include details on their services, their contingency plans, their trademark protection and anti-abuse procedures, and other related information. This would be required of any gTLD, with further hurdles in place to receive government support for GeoTLDs.

Funds

• Invest Policy for New gTLDs, Adopted Dec. 2012

ICANN published its first quarterly statement in December 2013. The statement revealed that as of September 2013, ICANN has spend $119.2 million on the New gTLD Program, and has $225.7 million remaining that is dedicated to the program.

Second Round of the New gTLD Program

Two months prior to the implementation of the new gTLD program, the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) requested that ICANN determine and announce a definitive date to implement a second round of new gTLD applications. According to CADNA President, Josh Bourne, a second round will "allow applicants more time to develop more comprehensive plans for utilising new gTLDs, as opposed to obtaining them simply to not miss out." A similar opinion was expressed earlier by Stuart Durham, EMEA sales director of Melbourne IT DBS. He said that some companies felt compelled to apply for their .brand gTLD because they feel that "if they don’t make a decision now, they will have to wait a few years." CADNA also brought up the request for second round of new gTLD application during the Congressional hearing on the new gTLD expansion program on December 14, 2011.

On February 7, 2012, the ICANN Board approved a resolution to implement a second application window for the new gTLD program. The Board appointed the ICANN CEO to work with the Internet community regarding the work plan and prerequisites needed to implement the second round of applications.

Lawsuits Over the Program

Name.Space, which has been operating an alternative root since 1996, sued ICANN in October, 2012, for trademark infringement and anti-competitive behavior. The company is seeking an injunction against the implementation of any of the 189 TLDs applied for in the 2011 round that overlap with its alternative root zone. The suit alleges that the company is being victimized by "ICANN insiders". In the 2000 TLD expansion round, Name.Space applied to have 118 of its 482 alternative TLDs added into ICANN's root zone. The plaintiff is asking for damages and and the injunction to prevent ICANN's approval and root implementation of the 189 overlapping TLDs.

Chinese version of this page

新通用顶级域项目

新通用顶级域项目是一项当前正在开展的项目，可以向 根区域添加无限数量的新 通用顶级域。该项目的目标是增加竞争、创新和消费者选择。. 第一轮申请于2012年1月12日开始，于2012年4月20日结束，在此期间，申请人通过顶级域申请系统（TAS）为他们选择的顶级域申请运营注册局。该申请窗口本应于4月12日关闭，但是由于TAS系统出现了一个小故障，导致系统关闭了一段时间，之后又重新开启一周，允许申请人完成对系统的使用。

在2012年4月，结束对互联网名称与数字地址分配机构（ICANN）的“新通用顶级域项目”的注册以后，结果显示共有1,268名申请人参与该项目。据6月13日（“揭晓日”）的结果显示，共有1,930份申请：其中有84份为社区申请，116份为针对[[IDN|]国际化域名（IDN）]的申请，还有230份申请中包含一名或多名申请人，因此需要通过字符串争用机制 来解决。这意味着“新通用顶级域项目”的首轮将最多产生1,409个新通用顶级域。

查看以下类别申请的完整清单:
新通用顶级域的所有申请 —通用类申请 — 通用类申请 — 品牌类申请 — 国际化域名类（IDN）申请

概述

不同类型的新通用顶级域申请:

• 标准或通用类顶级域 -在此类申请下，被提议的新通用顶级域面向公众开放注册。字符串没有任何限制。此类申请大部分都是通用类名称，但是部分通用类名称的申请，特别是亚马逊 和 谷歌 对通用类名称的申请，建议仅限以公司目的来使用这些顶级域。
• 社区类顶级域 -此类申请下被提议的新通用顶级域仅限于具有高度社会认知度的特定社区使用。申请应受到社区的强烈支持。社区顶级域的例子包括: .catholic, .thai, .aarp等。
• 地理类顶级域 -此类申请代表一个特定的城市或地区；此类顶级域需要当地政府的支持，例如: .nyc, .berlin, .tokyo等。
• 品牌类顶级域 -公司和机构可以使用其品牌名称和商标申请属于他们自己的顶级域。比如: .unicef, .motorola, .hitachi, .deloitte等。

历史背景

数年来，互联网名称与数字地址分配机构（ICANN）一直致力于添加新的扩展名，而目前的“新”通用顶级域项目实际上是通用顶级域的第四轮扩展。前几轮都具有局限性和针对性：在2000年，进行了一轮“概念验证”类扩展，在2003年进行了一轮赞助类sTLD顶级域扩展，以及正在持续进行的引入国际化的国家代码顶级域（IDN ccTLDs） 的过程。根据2000年和2003年的新通用顶级域的扩展结果，一项由通用名称支持组织（GNSO）开发的与新通用顶级域的引入相关的政策制定流程（PDP）从2005年一直进行到2007年。在开发这个政策制定流程期间，GNSO与ICANN全球互联网社区内的所有成员进行了广泛而细致的磋商。在2008年，19个特定政策建议被ICANN董事会采纳用以实施新通用顶级域，其中对分配和合同条款进行了详细描述。ICANN让全球互联网社区参与了一次开放的、包容的和透明的实施过程，让他们对创建新通用顶级域的“申请人指南”进行评价、审查并提供建议。该过程期间涉及了知识产权保护、社区利益、消费者保护和DNS稳定性的问题。在2008年，申请人指南的不同版本和多次草稿得以发布。到2011年6月，ICANN董事会启动了新通用顶级域项目，同时批准了新通用顶级域申请人指南。董事会宣布，在2012年1月有可能推出该指南的第9版，但是业内推测，更多的将是阐释而不是新规则和新政策，更改多于阐释的可能性很小。最终，第9版的推出与开放申请窗口在同一时间进行，并且不出所料，大部分的更改都是轻微的。第9版中的一个主要变动是授予政府咨询委员会（GAC） 更大的权力，从而强制ICANN董事会GAC发现的任何有问题的申请进行人工审核。具体GAC内部要有多少异议才会导致董事会进行磋商并不确定，但是可以少至一个国家的反对。这一变更是在美国政府秘书拉里•斯特里克林（Larry Strickling）发出的一封信后做出的，信中提到GAC在审核全部申请后将拥有创建新程序的权力；信件详细内容见下文。

新通用顶级域项目委员会

在2012年4月10日，ICANN董事会创建了新通用顶级域项目委员会,，主要负责其章程中“董事会拥有的与新通用顶级域项目相关的所有法定权力和决策权”。然而，ICANN章程中第2章条款XII下其他与项目有关的禁止被授权的职责除外。当前的成员包括：

• Cherine Chalaby (主席)
• Fadi Chehade (成员)
• Chris Disspain (成员)
• Bill Graham (成员)
• Olga Madruga-Forti (成员)
• Erika Mann (成员)
• Gonzalo Navarro (成员)
• Ray Plzak (成员)
• George Sadowsky (成员)
• Michael Silber (成员)
• Kuo-Wei Wu (成员)
• Heather Dryden (无表决权联络人)
• Jonne Soininen (无表决权联络人)

新通用顶级域路演

为了引起人们对新通用顶级域项目的关注，ICANN的首席执行官 Rod Beckstrom从2011年9月开始了一次世界巡回路演，并一直持续到12月。 此次巡回路演中，他本人亲自造访16个国家，而其他职员和董事会成员则造访了其他22个国家 。此次宣传也得到了主要新闻媒体的报道，比如CNN、卡塔尔半岛电视台（Al-Jazeera）、BBC、纽约时报等；部分针对巡回路演的报道对新通用顶级域项目表现出的态度是消极的。巡回路演仅被实际机构（ICANN）之外的极少数人认为是成功的，因为许多国家和公司依旧对该项目存有误解或知之甚少甚至一无所知。 在2012年1月，即通用顶级域项目启动前一周，由美国商务部的拉里•斯特里克林发至ICANN主席 Steve Crocker的一封信件中对ICANN未能成功教育主要品牌和有关各方进行了谴责。

申请流程

申请系统

主要文章: TAS

申请人支持项目

主要文章: 申请人支持项目 (ASP)

申请人支持项目（ASP）是一项由联合申请人支持工作组（JASWG）概念化的项目，旨在向经济困难的通用顶级域申请人提供折扣，从而确保新通用顶级域项目在世界范围的可使用性和该项目内部的竞争性。得到项目的接受后，可以把申请费用从$185,000减少至$47,000。

对ASP有意的实体可以通过三种途径参与:

1. 初创型通用顶级域注册局通过申请人支持名录享受无偿服务——新通用顶级域申请人，尤其是来自发展中国家的申请人，可以利用ICANN社区中提供经济或非经济型无偿服务的成员提供的经济和技术信息或者协助。
2. 申请经济援助——合格申请人将获得评估费用方面的减免。
3. 申请人支持基金——ICANN拨出了200万美元作为种子基金用以帮助经济困难的申请人。

在2012年2月3日，ICANN宣布其正在寻找志愿者，作为“支持申请人审查小组”（SARP）的成员，以负责评估新通用顶级域申请人是否有资格使用ASP提供的经济援助。

要求援助的新通用顶级域申请人清单可以通过这里查询。

开放申请窗口

申请系统按预定时间在2012年1月12日周四大约世界标准时间（UTC）的午夜对外开放。 在2012年1月19日，仅在ICANN开放新通用顶级域申请窗口后的一周，据其报道，已有25家公司在TAS系统上创建账户并且注册了新通用顶级域。然而，这并没有指出经过备案的申请数量是多少，因为考虑到每个TAS账户最多可以处理50份单独的申请。据一家名为Minds + Machines的公司透露，他们已经为其客户注册了20个扩展名。

TAS延迟和关闭申请窗口

在2012年4月12日，仅距离预定的TAS申请窗口关闭前数小时，ICANN的首席运营官Akram Atallah发表了一项申明，承认顶级域申请系统软件中可能出现的一个小故障导致部分用户能够看到其他用户的文件名称和用户名。他说，为了保护申请人信息，ICANN决定关闭该系统直至4月17日。Atallah先生还说，ICANN正在调查导致这个问题出现的原因，并且将采取必要措施来解决这一问题。

在Atallah发表申明之后，DomainIncite的Kevin Murphy报道说，一名申请人声称他在4月6日发现另一名申请人的一个文件被附加到他的申请中，于是他立即向ICANN上报了这个问题。这位申请人说：“我可以根据文件名称推断出申请人/字符串……”然而，该文件的实际内容是不可见的。这个TAS问题在互联网社区内部激起了不同的推测和质疑，尤其是TAS系统受到安全隐患的影响还要持续多久，申请人中有谁看到了其他申请，以及是否有申请人利用这个故障并提交了具有竞争性的报价。

在2012年4月14日，ICANN发表了另一份与TAS问题相关的申明。经互联网管理机构认定，3月19日的报告是唯一与此次技术故障有关的事件。

ICANN继续延迟开放TAS系统，几乎没有提供什么解释，并首次提到此次延迟可能持续到4月20日。

除了延迟开放申请窗口之外，ICANN还告知记者，该问题不是由网络攻击引起的，没有出现申请数据丢失的情况，而且TAS系统有望很快开放。

在2012年4月23日，ICANN宣布其能够确定所有受到TAS故障影响的申请人，而且用以修复系统的测试也正在顺利运行。此外，ICANN还宣布延迟发布所有已申请的新通用顶级域字符串，直至4月30日。两天后，ICANN发布更新信息，告知申请人TAS将于4月27日重新开放。 ICANN持续向互联网社区发布更新信息，告知用以解决系统问题的测试进度。在4月27日，互联网管理机构报道说，据其分析，仍有部分申请人受到影响，而用以改进系统的测试正在持续进行。ICANN再次延迟开放TAS系统，但是承诺将持续发布更新信息。

在2012年4月30日，ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom申明，他希望这个技术故障能够在他的任期满之前，并且在他于预定2012年6月29日在布拉格举行的 ICANN 44会议期间将职位移交给他的继任者之前解决。他说： “我希望我能够在布拉格移交接力棒之前，看到我们能够彻底解决这个技术性问题，告知申请人，重新开放窗口并且发布字符串。这不是在此刻的承诺，这绝对是代表着我作为首席执行官希望促使这个问题得以及时解决的意愿……如果我们能够更快地解决问题，那么则越快越好。”

在2012年5月2日，ICANN报道，已注册用户已有1268位，系统离线时大约有95,000份文件附件可访问。其预计发生了455次文件名和用户名可能被另一名申请人看到的事件。它还确定有105名申请人的文件名和用户名被另一名申请人查看过，有50名申请人可能查看了一名或多名申请人的文件名和用户名。ICANN向互联网社区保证，其依旧在努力改进系统从而修复这个技术问题。 在5月4日，ICANN发布消息称其收到的申请费用大约为3.5亿美元，但是在3月29日这个截止日期之前成功注册的214名潜在申请人的款项还没有收到。此外，互联网管理机构还报告说正在发送通知给各个申请人，告知他们是否受到软件的影响。通知过程预计在5月8日完成，而重新开放TAS系统的时间表则将在此后宣布。

ICANN在5月21日重新开放了顶级域申请系统。TAS系统整整停用了40天；这一故障的时长受到了ICANN的批评者以及支持者的批评。截止2012年5月30日，所有的申请人都能够登陆、查看和提交他们的申请。

揭晓日和后继事件

在揭晓日之后，发现有数名申请人的申请有误。作为对要求更改已提交申请的回应，ICANN开发了新通用顶级域申请更改请求流程和标准。请求通过新通用顶级域客户服务中心（CSC）进行提交，ICANN将根据以下7条标准来审核请求：

1. 说明——是否提供了合理的说明？
2. 证明之前的提交出错——是否可以证明如申请人声称，更改只是为了更改一个错误？
3. 其他第三方受影响——更改是否会实质性地影响其他第三方？
4. 先例——更改是否与其他已被批准的更改类似？更改是否会导致其他人要求进行类似的可能影响第三方的更改或者对项目导致不良影响？
5. 对申请人的公平性——允许更改是否会被认为对普通社区是公平的？不允许更改是否会被认为是不公平的？
6. 重要性——更改是否会影响评估得分或者需要重新评估部分或全部的申请？更改是否影响字符串争用或社区优先权考虑？
7. 时间选择——时间上是否会在某种程度上影响评估进程？

根据这样的比照结果，请求要么被批准，要么被拒绝，结果都将通知申请人。更改请求已被批准的申请人，其所做更改都将列在新通用顶级域的微型网站上，而且申请在进入申请流程的下一个阶段之前将至少被保留30天，这样公众就可以评论是否需要重新评估已做出的更改批准。对申请的机密部分进行的更改将被汇总并且不予公示，以此保护申请人的机密信息。

分批处理/抽签系统

主要文章：分 批处理

在数字射箭项目失败后，ICANN仍需要一个有效的系统作为分批处理申请或者计量申请的一种方法，从而朝着每年实施1,000个新通用顶级域的目标发展。在2012年10月10日，ICANN宣布其已经设计出一种计量程序，用以决定处理申请的顺序，而且这将是一种人工抽签。由于加利福尼亚州彩票法律的规定，类似于这样一个基于运气的流程起初并没有被ICANN采用，因为其总部位于加利福尼亚州。该组织后来申请了一项非营利性的“集资”豁免许可，从而获得运营这个彩票系统的权力。彩票的票价为100美元。抽签抽取的数字决定申请处理的顺序，首先发布初步评估，然后发布潜在竞争或正式反对，其来自政府咨询委员会（GAC）或者其他机构。已经通过初步评估并且没有其他未解决问题的申请人可以选择直接签署常规注册局协议，或者与ICANN商讨签署不同的协议。彩票抽签于2012年12月中旬举行。

授权

ICANN预计新的抽签/彩票系统应该可以加速新通用顶级域的实施，而授权预计将在2013年的第二季度开始，而非先前预计的2013年的第四季度或2014年的第一季度。初步评估结果将从2013年3月开始以每周150个的频率予以公布。合同签署和预授权测试将以大约每周20个的频率开展，这样在任何一年都将引入大约1,000个新通用顶级域。在此进程中， 国际化域名类（IDN） 新通用顶级域申请将被给予优先权，ICANN对此的解释是有利于互联网在全球范围内的更加多样化发展。

初步评估结果

在2013年3月22日，ICANN揭晓了第一批即将被评估为“通过” 初步评估的27个字符串。 ICANN在2013年8月30日发布了一篇新闻稿，声称他们已到达了一个重大的里程碑并且宣布新通用顶级域的初步评估已经结束。新闻稿中说：“在提交的1,930份新通用顶级域申请中，共有1,745份申请通过了初步评估，32份已经进入延期评估流程，而有121份申请从项目中撤回。”

进一步进展

2012年10月，在加拿大多伦多举办的ICANN 45届大会 上，Kurt Pritz公布了一些关于新通用顶级域项目的新消息。

• 会议结束后应该很快会接到政府咨询委员会（GAC）的预先预警。
• 在下一次于北京举办的ICANN会议之前，不会再进行合同签署和授权活动。
• 7名申请人撤回了他们的申请，在反对流程中没有出现反对的情况，而更改请求共有127个。在这些更改请求中，已获批准的是29个，84个正在接受审核，而有14个还需要与申请人进行跟进。
• 字符串相似性的分析工作将在11月进行。.
• 地理类名称审核正在进行分析，结果预计在11月26日宣布。
• 澄清问题测试试验已经开展，问题和调查问卷已于8月31日发送给各类申请人，回复的期限是9月17日。收到的统计结果如下：72%的调查对象说6000个字符的限制足够回答问题；一半以上（61%）的调查对象说金融性和技术性的澄清问题很清晰，一些反馈包括使用大纲模式取代段落，并要求ICANN披露当前评分，并提供符合要求的信用证范本和答案；一半以上的调查对象认为两周的时间不够回复澄清问题。
• 申请人支持项目的申请人目前正在接受5人专家组的分析。
• ICANN目前正在开发EBERO，即应急托管机构。他们计划用三个或者四个EBERO来代表北美、欧洲和亚洲。

导致以上这几点滞后的最主要问题就是延迟发布“字符串相似性审核小组”直至3月1日。这一问题导致了担忧，因为ICANN无法生成一个明确的规则用以定义如何将字符串归类为类似字符串，而且还有一个事实就是，“字符串相似性审核小组”的裁定是最终的，没有上诉程序。

封闭式通用字符串

在ICANN发布其1,930份申请信息后立即注意到，一些公司已经申请了许多与之业务相关的通用类名称，在其申请中写到他们想成为这些顶级域的唯一注册人。本轮没有对品牌类顶级域进行特别考虑，但是有人猜想认为ICANN将在未来为此类顶级域创建规则。因此，封闭式通用名称没有违反任何规则，因为它们是根据通用名称支持组织 （GNSO）流程开发的并且包含在申请人指南中。一些人提到，这其实是该项目的一种蓄意的副产品，已经提前考虑过，但其他人并不同意这个说法。

封闭式通用顶级域的最大申请人是亚马逊，许多人担心他们申请控制大量的通用类名称将导致其绕过传统的在线购物方式，并让其享受不公平的竞争优势。另一个申请许多封闭式通用名称的著名客户就是欧莱雅。 封闭式通用顶级域的最大申请人是亚马逊，许多人担心他们申请控制大量的通用类名称将导致其绕过传统的在线购物方式，并让其享受不公平的竞争优势。另一个申请许多封闭式通用名称的著名客户就是欧莱雅。[47]在2012年年末，亚马逊和其他申请封闭式通用字符串的公司收到了一份来自政府咨询委员会（GAC）主席Heather Dryden的GAC预先警报。预先警报系统是由GAC的一个成员发出，但表示更大的GAC组织可能会在之后发布正式的通知，建议ICANN 董事会在不作任何更改的情形下拒绝顶级域的申请。收到警报的申请人应当与提出异议的代表合作以解决问题。这位德国代表也提出了有关封闭式通用顶级域的问题。

随着进一步问题的出现，ICANN的新通用顶级域项目委员会关注了这个问题。2013年2月发布的ICANN 1月会议信息显示，他们甚至不清楚如何定义一个封闭式通用顶级域，其公共属性是什么，适当的补救策略应该是怎样的，而且进一步提到，申请和申请人指南之间并没有出现冲突，因此他们在没有收到通用名称支持组织（GNSO）政策制定流程的进一步指示之前无法进行评论或更改政策。但是，他们在2013年2月5日设立了一个公众评论期，用以明确什么是封闭式通用顶级域，以及注册局可运作“封闭式”或“开放式”字符串的标准是什么。

反对封闭式通用顶级域的观点来自微软，他们注意到封闭式通用顶级域会给互联网竞争带来隐患，于是一场网上请愿在来自NewgTLDsite.com的Tom Gilles的牵头下开展起来。

Top-Level Domain

Generic Names Supporting Organization. Develops and recommends to the Board substantive policies relating to generic top-level domains and other responsibilities set forth in the Bylaws (ICANN Bylaws).

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).

Internationalized Domain Name