Changes

{{Glossary|

{{RightTOC}}

|note  = This article is neutral, but is [[Sponsorship|sponsored]] by [[Verisign]],<br> the registry provider for 220 '''New gTLD''' applicants.<br>You can learn more about their services [http://www.verisigninc.com/?loc=en_US here].

The aim of the '''New gTLD Program'''  is to add an unlimited number of new [[gTLD]]s to the [[Root Zone|root zone]] in order to enhance competition, innovation, and consumer choice.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/program About the New gTLD Program icann.org]</ref> The first application round started on January 12, 2012, and ended on April 20, 2012, during which [[New gTLD Applicants|applicants]] applied via the [[TAS|TLD Application System]] (TAS) to run the registry for the TLD of their choice. The application window was supposed to close on April 12. Due to a glitch, the TAS system was shut down for a period of time before it reopened for a one-week window to allow users to finish their applications.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/8511-tas-glitch-not-an-attack-says-icann TAS glitch “not an attack” says ICANN], DomainIncite.com. Published 12 April 2012. Retrieved 19 December 2012.</ref>

|logo    = verisignlogo.png

|link  = http://icannwiki.com/index.php/Verisign

The '''New gTLD Program''' is a current program to add an unlimited number of new [[gTLD]]s to the [[Root Zone|root zone]]. The program's goal is to enhance competition, innovation, and consumer choice.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/program About the New gTLD Program icann.org]</ref> The first application round started on January 12th, 2012, and ended on April 20th, 2012, during which time [[New gTLD Applicants|applicants]] applied via the [[TAS|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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/8511-tas-glitch-not-an-attack-says-icann TAS glitch “not an attack” says ICANN], DomainIncite.com. Published 12 April 2012. Retrieved 19 December 2012.</ref>

In April 2012, after the closure of registration for the ICANN New gTLD Program, it was revealed that there were 1,268 applicants in the program.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/icann-expects-at-least-1268-new-gtld-applications/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DomainIncite+%28DomainIncite.com%29 ICANN Expects At Least 1268 New gTLD Applications, DomainIncite.com]</ref> On June, 13th ("Reveal Day"), it was announced that there were 1,930 applications: 84 of these were [[Community gTLD|community applications]], 116 are for [[IDN]]s, and 230 of the applications have one or more applicant and will thus go through [[String Contention|string contention]] processes. This means the first round of the new gTLD program could create a maximum of 1,409 new TLDs.<ref>[http://www.thedomains.com/2012/06/13/nnew-gtlds-by-the-numbers-1930-apps-751-apps-in-conflict-max-number-of-new-gtlds-1409/ New gTLDs by the Numbers, TheDomains.com]</ref>

<center>See complete lists of:<br><big>[[All New gTLD Applications]] - [[New gTLD Generic Applications|Generic Applications]] - [[New gTLD Geographic Applications|Geographic Applications]] - [[New gTLD Brand Applications|Brand Applications]] [[New gTLD IDN Applications|IDN Applications]]</big></center><br/>

 

<center>See complete lists of:<br><big>[[All New gTLD Applications]] &#151;[[New gTLD Generic Applications|Generic Applications]] &#151; [[New gTLD Geographic Applications|Geographic Applications]] &#151; [[New gTLD Brand Applications|Brand Applications]] &#151; [[New gTLD IDN Applications|IDN Applications]]</big></center><br/>

==Overview==

==Overview==

The different types of new gTLD applications:<ref>[http://urbanbrain.jp/en/new-gtld/application-types/ New gTLD Application Types]</ref>  

The different types of new gTLD applications:<ref>[http://urbanbrain.jp/en/new-gtld/application-types/ New gTLD Application Types]</ref>  

* [[New gTLD Generic 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

* [[New gTLD Generic 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 restrictions. 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 gTLD|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]]

* [[Community gTLD|Community TLD]] - the proposed new gTLDs under this application are restricted to a specific community with a high degree of social awareness. The application should be strongly supported by the community.  Examples of community TLDs include: [[.catholic]], [[.thai]], [[.aarp]]

* [[New gTLD Geographic Applications|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]]

* [[New gTLD Geographic Applications|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]]

* [[New gTLD Brand Applications|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]]

* [[New gTLD Brand Applications|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===

===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 [[sTLD]]s in 2003, and an ongoing process to introduce [[IDN ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/watch-icann-approve-some-new-gtlds/ Watch ICANN Approve Some New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref> After the results of the 2000 and 2003 expansions of new gTLDs, a [[PDP|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]].<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/about/program About the New gTLD Program]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/icann-confirms-possible-new-applicant-guidebook/ ICANN Confirms Possible New Applicant Guidebook, DomainIncite.com]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/gac-gets-more-power-to-block-controversial-gtlds/ GAC Gets more Power to Block Controversial gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

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 [[sTLD]]s in 2003, and an ongoing process to introduce [[IDN]] [[ccTLD]]s.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/watch-icann-approve-some-new-gtlds/ Watch ICANN Approve Some New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref> After the results of the 2000 and 2003 expansions of new gTLDs, a [[PDP|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]].<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/about/program About the New gTLD Program]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/icann-confirms-possible-new-applicant-guidebook/ ICANN Confirms Possible New Applicant Guidebook, DomainIncite.com]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/gac-gets-more-power-to-block-controversial-gtlds/ GAC Gets more Power to Block Controversial gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

===New gTLD Program Committee===

===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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-10apr12-en.htm Establishment of New gTLD Program Committee]</ref> The members are:

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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-10apr12-en.htm Establishment of New gTLD Program Committee]</ref> The current members are:

* [[Cherine Chalaby]] (Chair)

* [[Cherine Chalaby]] (Chair)

* [[Akram Atallah]] (Member)

* [[Fadi Chehade]] (Member)

* [[Chris Disspain]] (Member)

* [[Chris Disspain]] (Member)

* [[Bill Graham]] (Member)

* [[Bill Graham]] (Member)

* [[Erika Mann]] (Member)

* [[Alexander_Svensson]] (Member)

* [[Gonzalo Navarro]] (Member)

* [[Gonzalo Navarro]] (Member)

* [[Ray Plzak]] (Member)

* [[Ray Plzak]] (Member)

* [[George Sadowsky]] (Member)

* [[George Sadowsky]] (Member)

* [[Michael Silber]] (Member)

* [[Michael Silber]] (Member)

* [[Kuo-Wei Wu]] (Member)

* [[Kuo-Wei Wu]] (Member)

* [[Thomas Roessler]] (Non Voting Liaison)

* [[Heather Dryden]] (Non Voting Liaison)

* [[Jonne Soininen]] (Non Voting Liaison)

===New gTLD Roadshow===

===New gTLD Roadshow===

===Batching/Drawing System===

===Batching/Drawing System===

: ''Main article: [[Batching]]''

: ''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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10oct12-en.htm Announcement, ICANN.org]</ref> 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 will cost $100. The number pulled in the draw would determine the order in which applications proceed, 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]].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10oct12-en.htm Announcement 2 10Oct12, ICANN.org]</ref> The lottery will be held in mid-December, 2012.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10729-new-gtld-winners-will-be-decided-by-lottery-after-all New gTLD Winners Will be Decided by Lottery After All, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

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.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10oct12-en.htm Announcement, ICANN.org]</ref> 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]].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-10oct12-en.htm Announcement 2 10Oct12, ICANN.org]</ref> The lottery was held in mid-December, 2012.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10729-new-gtld-winners-will-be-decided-by-lottery-after-all New gTLD Winners Will be Decided by Lottery After All, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

===Delegation===

===Delegation===

===Initial Evaluation Results===

===Initial Evaluation Results===

On March 22nd 2013, ICANN announced the first 27 strings to be evaluated as "passing" [[Initial Evaluation]]. All IE results are expected to be released by August, 2013.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12352-first-27-new-gtlds-pass-evaluation First 27 New gTLDs pass Evaluation, DomainIncite.com] Published Mar 22, Retrieved March 29 2013</ref>

On March 22nd 2013, ICANN announced the first 27 strings to be evaluated as "passing" [[Initial Evaluation]].<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12352-first-27-new-gtlds-pass-evaluation First 27 New gTLDs pass Evaluation, DomainIncite.com] Published Mar 22, Retrieved March 29 2013</ref> [[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." <ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/press/releases/release-30aug13-en Press Release Aug 30, ICANN.org] Retrieved Sept 9, 2013</ref>

==ICANN 45 & Further Developments==

==Further Developments==

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

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.

* [[GAC]] Early Warnings should be expected shortly after the close of the meeting.

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.<ref name="WTR"></ref><ref>[http://www.thedomains.com/2013/02/06/microsoft-is-latest-to-come-out-against-closed-generic-new-gtlds-in-letter-to-icann/ Microsoft is Latest to Come Out Against Closed Generic New gTLDs in Letter to ICANN, TheDomains.com] Published and Retrieved 6 Feb 2013</ref>

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.<ref name="WTR"></ref><ref>[http://www.thedomains.com/2013/02/06/microsoft-is-latest-to-come-out-against-closed-generic-new-gtlds-in-letter-to-icann/ Microsoft is Latest to Come Out Against Closed Generic New gTLDs in Letter to ICANN, TheDomains.com] Published and Retrieved 6 Feb 2013</ref>

==Opposition==

==Opposition==

A number of high profile opponents have come 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,<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/icann-facing-growing-pressure-over-new-domain-name-plan-20111025 ICANN Facing Growing Pressure Over New Domain Name Plan, NationalJournal.com]]</ref> and others. Major corporations involved with these organizations include: Adidas, Dell, Toyota, Wal-Mart, Kraft Foods, and other prominent American and internationally known brands.<ref>[http://www.ana.net/content/show/id/22399 ANA.net]</ref> ICANN's new gTLD program also recieved negative Op-Eds by the editorial boards of the New York Times and Washington Post.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/opinion/expanding-internet-domains.html?_r=3&ref=internetcorpforassignednamesandnumbers Exapnding Internet Domains, NYTimes.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-rush/2011/12/09/gIQA5Ms9nO_story.html What's the .rush, WashingtonPost.com]</ref> 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]].<ref>[http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/12/icann.shtm ICANN, FTC.gov]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=c81ce454-f519-4373-a51d-234c61755e39 Testimony of Esther Dyson, Commerce.Senate.gov]</ref>

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,<ref>[http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/icann-facing-growing-pressure-over-new-domain-name-plan-20111025 ICANN Facing Growing Pressure Over New Domain Name Plan, NationalJournal.com]]</ref> and others. Major corporations involved with these organizations include: Adidas, Dell, Toyota, Wal-Mart, Kraft Foods, and other prominent American and internationally known brands.<ref>[http://www.ana.net/content/show/id/22399 ANA.net]</ref> ICANN's new gTLD program also recieved negative Op-Eds by the editorial boards of the New York Times and Washington Post.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/opinion/expanding-internet-domains.html?_r=3&ref=internetcorpforassignednamesandnumbers Exapnding Internet Domains, NYTimes.com]</ref><ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-rush/2011/12/09/gIQA5Ms9nO_story.html What's the .rush, WashingtonPost.com]</ref> 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]].<ref>[http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/12/icann.shtm ICANN, FTC.gov]</ref> 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.<ref>[http://commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=c81ce454-f519-4373-a51d-234c61755e39 Testimony of Esther Dyson, Commerce.Senate.gov]</ref>

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 [http://www.kernelmag.com/comment/opinion/2012/01/its-time-to-place-the-web-in-safer-hands/ here] and [http://paidcontent.org/article/419-new-internet-names-feared-loathed-by-all/ here].

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 [http://www.kernelmag.com/comment/opinion/2012/01/its-time-to-place-the-web-in-safer-hands/ here] and [http://paidcontent.org/article/419-new-internet-names-feared-loathed-by-all/ here].

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."

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, also came to the support of ICANN. CADNA's change of heart came about as their sister group, [[FairWinds Partners]], decided to provide new gTLD consultancy services. 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/congressmen-ask-for-new-gtlds-delay/ Congressmen ask for new gTLDs delay, domainincite.com]</ref>

[[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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/congressmen-ask-for-new-gtlds-delay/ Congressmen ask for new gTLDs delay, domainincite.com]</ref>

The following week, the US Congress sent a letter addressed to ICANN President and CEO [[Rod Beckstrom]] and [[ICANN Board|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.

The following week, the US Congress sent a letter addressed to ICANN President and CEO [[Rod Beckstrom]] and [[ICANN Board|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.

==Funds==

==Funds==

* [http://www.icann.org/en/about/financials/investment-policy-new-gtld Invest Policy for New gTLDs, Adopted Dec. 2012]

* [http://www.icann.org/en/about/financials/investment-policy-new-gtld Invest Policy for New gTLDs, Adopted Dec. 2012]

==Second Round of the New gTLD Program==

==Second Round of the New gTLD Program==

===Lawsuits Over the Program===

===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 [[TLD]]s applied for in the 2011 round that overlap with its alternative [[Root Zone|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 [[TLD]]s 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10754-company-files-for-injunction-against-189-new-gtlds Company Files for Injunction Against 189 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

[[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 [[TLD]]s applied for in the 2011 round that overlap with its alternative [[Root Zone|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 [[TLD]]s 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.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10754-company-files-for-injunction-against-189-new-gtlds Company Files for Injunction Against 189 New gTLDs, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

==References==

==References==

{{reflist}}

{{reflist}}</div>

[[Category: Glossary]]

[[Category:Glossary]]

[[Category:New gTLD Program]]