Changes

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.<ref>User Summary, AM</ref>

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.<ref>User Summary, AM</ref>

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 closed generics is [[L'Oréal]].<ref name="WTR">[http://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/daily/Detail.aspx?g=7be56061-2229-412c-8f71-55bc20932cd8&utm_source=buffer&buffer_share=c3e5d WorldTrademarkReview.com]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://www.name.com/blog/ntlds/2013/01/the-gtld-land-grab-controversy-google-amazon-and-the-gac-part-ii/ The gTLD Land Grab Controversy Google Amazon and the GAC Part II, Name.com] Pub 14 Jan 2013, Retrieved 6 Jan 2013</ref><ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Warnings GAC Early Warnings, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref>

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]].<ref name="WTR">[http://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/daily/Detail.aspx?g=7be56061-2229-412c-8f71-55bc20932cd8&utm_source=buffer&buffer_share=c3e5d WorldTrademarkReview.com]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://www.name.com/blog/ntlds/2013/01/the-gtld-land-grab-controversy-google-amazon-and-the-gac-part-ii/ The gTLD Land Grab Controversy Google Amazon and the GAC Part II, Name.com] Pub 14 Jan 2013, Retrieved 6 Jan 2013</ref><ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/GAC+Early+Warnings GAC Early Warnings, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref>

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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb13-en.htm Announcement, ICANN.org]5 February 2013</ref>

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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-05feb13-en.htm Announcement, ICANN.org]5 February 2013</ref>