Changes

{{TLD|

{{TLD|

|logo  =

|logo  =

|status = Proposed

|status = Delegated

|manager  =  

|manager  =  

|country  =  

|country  =Global

|registryprovider  =  

|registryprovider  =  

|date  =

|date  =

|type  = [[Community gTLD]] <br> [[gTLD|Generic]]

|type  = [[Community gTLD]]

|category = [[:Category:Industry New gTLDs|Industry]]

|category = [[:Category:Industry New gTLDs|Industry]]

|community  = Environmental community

|community  = Environmental community

|keypeople  =  

|keypeople  =  

}}

}}

'''.eco''' is a proposed [[gTLD]] in [[ICANN]]'s [[New gTLD Program|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. As of April 2016, contention status is "on-hold" pending ICANN accountability mechanisms.<ref>[https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/stringcontentionstatus]</ref>

'''.eco''' is a [[gTLD]] in [[ICANN]]'s [[New gTLD Program|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==

 

 

==Applicants==

# [[Big Room Inc.]] - [[Community gTLD | Community-designated Application]]. This applicant submitted a [[PIC|Public Interest Commitment]], which can be downloaded [https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1753 here].

# [[Big Room Inc.]] - [[Community gTLD | Community-designated Application]]. This applicant submitted a [[PIC|Public Interest Commitment]], which can be downloaded [https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1753 here].

Subsequently, an [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/various-v-icann-eco-hotel-2015-09-02-en independent review panel] was convened to consider whether the ICANN Board Governance Committee acted appropriately in issuing a [https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/determination-little-birch-minds-machines-18nov14-en.pdf final determination] denying Little Birch, LLC and Minds + Machines Group Limited's reconsideration request.  

Subsequently, an [https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/various-v-icann-eco-hotel-2015-09-02-en independent review panel] was convened to consider whether the ICANN Board Governance Committee acted appropriately in issuing a [https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/determination-little-birch-minds-machines-18nov14-en.pdf 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 <ref>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/various-v-icann-eco-hotel-2015-09-02-en</ref>. 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.)"<ref>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-despegar-online-et-al-final-declaration-12feb16-en.pdf</ref>. The ICANN Board adopted the final declaration March 10 2016 <ref>https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en</ref>.

A hearing was held on December 7 2015. A final declaration was issued on February 12 2016 <ref>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/various-v-icann-eco-hotel-2015-09-02-en</ref>. 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.)"<ref>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-despegar-online-et-al-final-declaration-12feb16-en.pdf</ref>. The ICANN Board adopted the final declaration March 10 2016 <ref>https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en</ref>. The .eco domain was delegated on August 29th, 2016.  

==Objection==

==Objection==

[http://www.investegate.co.uk/Article.aspx?id=201109300700572363P Top Level Domain Hdg. Dot Eco LLC will apply for .eco gTLD]</ref> However, they did not apply through the Dot Eco LLC venture, but instead applied on their own behalf.<ref>[http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus Application Status, gTLDResult.ICANN.org]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/will_anyone_qualify_as_a_community_tld/ Will Anyone Qualify As a Community TLD?]</ref>

[http://www.investegate.co.uk/Article.aspx?id=201109300700572363P Top Level Domain Hdg. Dot Eco LLC will apply for .eco gTLD]</ref> However, they did not apply through the Dot Eco LLC venture, but instead applied on their own behalf.<ref>[http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus Application Status, gTLDResult.ICANN.org]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://www.circleid.com/posts/will_anyone_qualify_as_a_community_tld/ Will Anyone Qualify As a Community TLD?]</ref>

[[planet.ECO LLC]], a small disadvantaged business based in Connecticut is the registrant and exclusive trademark holder of .ECO®.  The small business is also a gTLD contender for the ".eco" string and filed an infringement case against gTLD contenders 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 infringing on their mark, 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. In total, five trademark cancellation attempts were made by Big Room Inc. and Dot Eco LLC, all of which were dismissed without prejudice.<ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92051924&pty=CAN&eno=21 USPTO Cancellation number 92051924]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92055469&pty=CAN&eno=11 USPTO Cancellation number 92055469]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92055197&pty=CAN&eno=13 USPTO Cancellation number 92055197]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92060403&pty=CAN&eno=12 USPTO Cancellation number 92060403]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92060403&pty=CAN&eno=18 USPTO Cancellation number 92060403]</ref>. Dot Eco LLC 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. Big Room's motion to dismiss was granted. Planet.eco withdrew the case against Dot Eco LLC.  

[[planet.ECO LLC]], a small disadvantaged business based in Connecticut is the registrant and exclusive trademark holder of .ECO®.  The small business is also a gTLD contender for the ".eco" string and filed an infringement case against gTLD contenders 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 infringing on their mark, 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. In total, five trademark cancellation attempts were made by Big Room Inc. and Dot Eco LLC, all of which were dismissed without prejudice.<ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92051924&pty=CAN&eno=21 USPTO Cancellation number 92051924]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92055469&pty=CAN&eno=11 USPTO Cancellation number 92055469]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92055197&pty=CAN&eno=13 USPTO Cancellation number 92055197]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92060403&pty=CAN&eno=12 USPTO Cancellation number 92060403]</ref><ref>[http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=92060403&pty=CAN&eno=18 USPTO Cancellation number 92060403]</ref>. Dot Eco LLC 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. Big Room's motion to dismiss was granted. Planet.eco withdrew the case against Dot Eco LLC.

===Early Criticism===

===Early Criticism===