Changes

* It will contravene the rights of brand owners

* It will contravene the rights of brand owners

By not addressing these issues ANA has argued that ICANN is not working in the public interest, which is its mandate. As is, ANA believes that ICANN is affectively cornering brand owners in, whereby they must either pay high costs to run a TLD or risk brand dilution.<ref>[http://www.domainnews.com/en/association-of-national-advertisers-asks-icann-to-abandon-new-tlds.html Association of National Advertises ask ICANN to Abandon new TLDs, domainnews.com]</ref>

By not addressing these issues, ANA has argued that ICANN is not working in the public interest, which is its mandate. As is, ANA believes that ICANN is effectively cornering brand owners in, whereby they must either pay high costs to run a TLD or risk brand dilution.<ref>[http://www.domainnews.com/en/association-of-national-advertisers-asks-icann-to-abandon-new-tlds.html Association of National Advertises ask ICANN to Abandon new TLD], DomainNews.com.</ref>

 

 

ANA emphasized that due to the high number of TLDs to be unveiled by ICANN's [[new gTLD Program]], policing TLDs on one-by-one basis will be difficult, and that taking precautions beforehand will be an important step in preventing future [[cybersquatting]] and fraud difficulties. Cited difficulties include the fraudulent use of brand names in secondary domains -- such as when any brand name is paired with the generic domain [[.sucks]] -- or single company ownership of generic domains -- such as if L'Oreal owned [[.hair]], [[.makeup]], or [[.beauty]].<ref name="marketingvox"></ref>

 

Continued Jaffe,  "The cost to companies that want to defensively register domains at the second level could mount easily into the multi-millions of dollars. The costs of defensive registrations also could be economically unfeasible for small and medium sized companies that will face enhanced risks of cybersquatting, typosquatting and phishing in the expanding top level domain universe."<ref name="marketingvox"></ref>

 

===ICANN & Community Response===

===ICANN & Community Response===

ICANN CEO, [[Rod Beckstrom]] has said that ICANN will “vigorously defend” its gTLD program and the multistakeholder model that created it, asserting that “its responsibility [is to the] broad public interest of the global Internet community, rather than to the specific interests of any particular group”.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/icann-responds-to-ana-criticism/2011/08/10/gIQAIork6I_blog.html ICANN Responds to ANA criticism, WashingtonPost.com]</ref>

ICANN CEO, [[Rod Beckstrom]] has said that ICANN will “vigorously defend” its gTLD program and the multistakeholder model that created it, asserting that “its responsibility [is to the] broad public interest of the global Internet community, rather than to the specific interests of any particular group”.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/icann-responds-to-ana-criticism/2011/08/10/gIQAIork6I_blog.html ICANN Responds to ANA criticism], WashingtonPost.com. Published 2011 August 10.</ref>

There has been little sympathy for ANA and CRIDO within the domain industry, even among those who are not supporters of the new [[gTLD]] program. It has been noted by numerous commentators, and even [[ICANN CEO]] [[Rod Beckstrom]], that ANA commented twice on previous drafts on the new gTLD guidebook. They were clearly aware of the program, but failed to create its very loud opposition campaign until about 6 months after the approval of the program, and just a few months before applications are to be accepted.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2011/11/14/why-crido-has-no-cred/ Why CRIDO has no cred, DomainNameWire.com]</ref> The fact is that ICANN had been producing the final program through its [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder model]] for years, and produced a total of 6 draft guidebooks before approving the final version. ANA had the opportunity to participate in this process, as they knew about it, but chose to become only slightly involved.<ref>[http://www.thedomains.com/2011/11/11/the-opposition-to-the-new-gtld-program-is-looking-like-the-fsc-vs-xxx-more-everyday/ The Opposition to the New gTLD Program is looking Like the FSC vs XX Everyday, TheDomains.com]</ref>

There has been little sympathy for ANA and CRIDO within the domain industry, even among those who are not supporters of the new [[gTLD]] program. It has been noted by numerous commentators, and even [[ICANN CEO]] [[Rod Beckstrom]], that ANA commented twice on previous drafts on the new gTLD guidebook. They were clearly aware of the program, but failed to create its very loud opposition campaign until about 6 months after the approval of the program, and just a few months before applications are to be accepted.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2011/11/14/why-crido-has-no-cred/ Why CRIDO has no cred, DomainNameWire.com]</ref> The fact is that ICANN had been producing the final program through its [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder model]] for years, and produced a total of 6 draft guidebooks before approving the final version. ANA had the opportunity to participate in this process, as they knew about it, but chose to become only slightly involved.<ref>[http://www.thedomains.com/2011/11/11/the-opposition-to-the-new-gtld-program-is-looking-like-the-fsc-vs-xxx-more-everyday/ The Opposition to the New gTLD Program is looking Like the FSC vs XX Everyday], TheDomains.com. Published 2011 November 11.</ref>

===Outside Response===

===Outside Response===

It seems their intensive lobbying may have been key in securing a U.S. Senate hearing on new gTLDs, scheduled for December 8th, 2011.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/12/02/senate-hearing-gtlds Senate Hearing gTLDs, news.dot-nxt.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2011/12/05/ICANN-gTLD-Senate-Hearing-120511.aspx ICANN gTLD Senate Hearings, BrandChannel.com]</ref> The hearing was convened by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.<ref>[http://www.domainnews.com/en/us-senate-committee-to-hold-hearings-on-new-gtld-concerns.html US Senate Committee to Hold Hearings on New gTLD Concerns, DomainNews.com]</ref> Indeed, [[Dan Jaffe]], ANA's VP of Government Relations, was announced as a witness ahead of the actual hearing.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/dyson-confirmed-for-new-gtlds-senate-hearing/ Dyson Confirmed for New gTLDs Senate Hearing, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

It seems their intensive lobbying may have been key in securing a U.S. Senate hearing on new gTLDs, scheduled for December 8th, 2011.<ref>[http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/12/02/senate-hearing-gtlds Senate Hearing gTLDs, news.dot-nxt.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2011/12/05/ICANN-gTLD-Senate-Hearing-120511.aspx ICANN gTLD Senate Hearings, BrandChannel.com]</ref> The hearing was convened by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.<ref>[http://www.domainnews.com/en/us-senate-committee-to-hold-hearings-on-new-gtld-concerns.html US Senate Committee to Hold Hearings on New gTLD Concerns, DomainNews.com]</ref> [[Dan Jaffe]], ANA's VP of Government Relations, was announced as a witness ahead of the actual hearing.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/dyson-confirmed-for-new-gtlds-senate-hearing/ Dyson Confirmed for New gTLDs Senate Hearing], DomainIncite.com.</ref>

 

Despite ANA's opposition to the program it was common knowledge that many of its largest members would still be filing new gTLD applications. This was generally suspected, but in some cases had already been announced, such as the [[.canon]] bid announced by ANA member [[Canon]].<ref>[http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2011/10/21/gTLD-Dot-Branding-Deloitte-Canon-Motorola-102111.aspx gTLD Dot Branding Deloitte Canon Motorola, BrandChannel.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.ana.net/members/list Members List, ANA.net]</ref> This was further confirmed in January, 2012, just days before the launch of the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]], when [[Melbourne IT]] announced it was working on over 100 new gTLD applications for clients, including ANA members.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/melbourne-it-involved-in-100-gtld-applications/ Melbourne IT involved in 100 gTLD applications, DomainIncite.com]</ref> In the end, approximately 100 members of ANA applied for new gTLDs, although many of the applications were probably defensive. Most applied only for their trademarks, but some, including Allstate's applications for [[.carinsurance]] and [[.autoinsurance]], and Wal-Mart's and Safeway's competing applications for [[.grocery]], applied for generic terms as well.<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2012/06/15/about-100-ana-members-apply-for-new-top-level-domains/ About 100 ANA members apply for new top level domains, domainnamewire.com]</ref>

===ANA Members' new gTLD Bids===

===Do Not Sell List Proposal===

Despite ANA's opposition to the program it was common knowledge that many of its largest members would still be making new gTLD bids. This was generally suspected, but in some cases had already been announced, such as the .canon bid announced by ANA member Canon.<ref>[http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2011/10/21/gTLD-Dot-Branding-Deloitte-Canon-Motorola-102111.aspx gTLD Dot Branding Deloitte Canon Motorola, BrandChannel.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.ana.net/members/list Members List, ANA.net]</ref> This was further confirmed in January 2012, just days before the launch of the [[New gTLD Program|new gTLD program]], when [[Melbourne IT]] announced it was working on over 100 new gTLD applications for clients, including ANA members.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/melbourne-it-involved-in-100-gtld-applications/ Melbourne IT involved in 100 gTLD applications, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

A few days prior to the scheduled implementation of the new gTLD program, ANA accepted that ICANN will not delay its schedule and proposed the "Do Not Sell List" as a solution to the concerns of brand owners. The Do Not Sell List will include all the brand names of NGO's, IGO's and commercial stakeholders concerned in protecting their brands will be registered temporarily at no cost and it will be maintained by ICANN during the first round of application. ANA volunteered to organize a team of interested constituencies to work with ICANN during the first round of application to address the issues raised by each organization in the list. If no agreement was met after the first round of application, all parties will be free to pursue their legal and equitable rights without prejudice.<ref>[http://www.ana.net/content/show/id/icann-letter-010912 Open Letter to ICANN Board: Answers Needed as Objections Mount]</ref>

===Videos to ICANN===

===Videos to ICANN===

ANA produced a few YouTube videos calling ICANN's claims of community consensus "lies" and attacking the new gTLD program, and also giving a background to ICANN's program and their, albeit belated, opposition to it. Both of the following videos were produced in November, 2011.

ANA produced a few YouTube videos calling ICANN's claims of community consensus "lies" and attacking the new gTLD program, and also giving a background to ICANN's program and their, albeit belated, opposition to it. Both of the following videos were produced in November, 2011.

<videoflash>ItXF6fI9HNY</videoflash>

{{#ev:youtube|ItXF6fI9HNY}}

<videoflash>Nj-bvBtTO8U</videoflash>

{{#ev:youtube|Nj-bvBtTO8U}}

==Community==

==Community==

==References==

==References==

{{reflist}}

{{reflist}}</div>

[[Category:Associations]]

[[Category:Companies|ANA]]