Carefully Constructed New gTLD Program Moves Forward

by Kurt Pritz on December 12, 2011

Senator Jay Rockefeller’s introductory statement at the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation’s hearing regarding ICANN’s New gTLD Program on December 8, 2011 went right to the issue: “I think we have to get used to dot-hotels. I think we have to get used to dot-auto.”

With that comment, the Chairman seemed to welcome the possibility of greater online innovation and competition. These are two core reasons for the existence of the new program that could potentially introduce hundreds of new top-level domains names into the global Internet.

Senator Rockefeller cautioned that expansion of the domain name system should be done slowly and carefully – and ICANN shares that view.

The other witnesses criticized the program but even if some of their criticisms sounded reasonable, those criticisms were dated and thoroughly addressed during the seven-year development of the program.

I gave the Committee a brief history of the new gTLD program and highlighted the seven years of thorough, transparent and inclusive discussion and debate, including: 2400 public comments from 47 extended comment periods that resulted in over 1400 pages of comment summary and analysis, formation of ten independent expert working groups, and 59 explanatory memoranda and independent reports.

Not only were the comments of my fellow witnesses received and considered during this time, their recommendations were largely adopted. A long and careful deliberative process produced this program. World-class experts on intellectual property, economics and Internet security developed solutions and those solutions were reviewed by the Internet community and vetted by governments.

I also explained that new gTLDs will have even greater safeguards than the TLD registries that exist today and will include enhanced protections for trademark holders. The new environment will sharply reduce the need for defensive registrations.

Senators Amy Klobuchar and Kelly Ayotte expressed the need for engagement by law enforcement in this process and urged ICANN to work closely with law enforcement agencies to make the Internet environment more secure. I clearly stated ICANN’s commitment to implement law enforcement recommendations wherever possible, as soon as possible.

I pointed to ICANN’s past work in the development of consumer protections, the history of collaborating with the law enforcement community, and the ongoing, urgent negotiations with registrars to improve consumer protections in the contracts registrars sign with ICANN.

In response to their comments, I also confirmed ICANN’s commitment to monitor the new gTLD process to ensure ongoing, smooth operation of the planned, time-phased delegation of new gTLDs. This commitment was easily made as it is something ICANN already takes very seriously and has embedded in its planning.

My sincere hope is that the facts I gave the Senate Commerce Committee last week, and will give the House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology on Wednesday, will help create greater understanding of this new era of online innovation, and bring some balance to the PR offensive launched by some parties.

As we move forward with the launch, it’s worth bearing in mind where we have been and what is at stake. U.S. Assistant Secretary of Commerce Lawrence E. Strickling summarized this in his recent comments regarding the multistakeholder process that led to the approval of the New gTLD program: “The multistakeholder process does not guarantee that everyone will be satisfied with the outcome. But it is critical to preserving the model of Internet governance that has been so successful to date that all parties respect and work through the process and accept the outcome once a decision is reached.”

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

Jim Fleming 12.13.11 at 2:02 pm

The “Carefully Constructed New gTLD Program”
is one more chapter in the Jaw.Dropping.History

New Internet(s) – some NOT “Carefully Constructed” will be
built to serve the General Public and provide Public Benefit.

The.Big.Lie.Society has demonstrated for almost 20 years how
to serve their PRIVATE Benefit while claiming to be a Public Benefit.
All people can do is take names and document the history.
It is a sad chapter in the history of mankind on planet .EARTH.

Jothan Frakes 12.13.11 at 4:35 pm

Kurt, we in the community who saw the composition of the panelists were concerned that it was heavily weighted with opponents of the program.

Gratefully, there was little that the vocal minority of opposition were able to do to stifle the job creation, competition, and innovation that the new TLDs will hopefully enable once finally available.

Your appearance was thoughtful, respectful, and did much to educate on the practical and actual mechanisms built in to the applicant guidebook and process that address false statements and/or wildly exaggerated concerns.

The concerns that the ANA or others express about the costs and impacts are not without merit in the existing TLDs, but I have difficulty seeing where those issues in new TLDs would rise to the level of exaggeration being communicated by the TLD hater camp.

The process was baked in a multi-year, multi-stakeholder oven. There are so many rights protection safeguards and barriers to entry for bad actors – it just really seems unlikely that we’d see so many issues as are being claimed.

Jim Fleming 12.13.11 at 6:19 pm

“The process was baked in a multi-year, multi-stakeholder oven.”

The process was DELAYED until it became obvious the Real NET.Community will route around ICANN and the rest of the ISOC Eco.System. [That can not be stopped]

It was notable that the ICANN CEO did not show up and high-level U.S. Department of Commerce officials.

The 300+ page Applicant (Lawyer-driven) Approach is laughable when compared to automated technical systems that will be rolled out.

The Free Market forces (at least in the .USA) will finally be given a choice. Serious software systems from serious companies should be
able to save a high percentage of people from

Larry 12.14.11 at 11:56 pm

To be prudent, simply start with brandTLDs.

Granting generics will lead to monopolies sought to be avoided by new gTLDs, and will leads to subdomain mess.

Jim Fleming 12.15.11 at 10:05 am

“To be prudent, simply start with brandTLDs.”

“brandTLDs” make absolutely no sense. Why would a strong brand owner desire to have their brand become a GENERIC ?

ICANN once promised they would never operate a Registry. ICANN is clearly going into the Brand Registry business at $185,000 start-up cost and $25,000 per year. That hardly seems to be a non-profit public benefit function.

The new Automated Peer-2-Peer DNS has 4096 Slots with Trending TLDs. It seems unlikely strong brands could make it into the list of 4096 Generic Labels. With nearly 100% market share for consumers that matter, DNSMASQ should be able to circumvent the ICANN nonsense.

Jim Fleming 12.15.11 at 10:22 am

“Granting generics will lead to monopolies…”

It is unfortunate that the millions spent on ICANN legal development was NOT spent on technical solutions.

ICANN has orchestrated a complex Meat.Space Registry-Registrar Domain Monetization industry that grants monopolies (aka Licenses to Print Money).

The I* Eco.System insiders have enjoyed decades of their monopolies derived from the U.S. Government .COM .NET .ORG .ARPA work products.

The NEW Peer-2-Peer DNS is NOT Applicant Based. There is NO IANA. There is NO Single Point of Control – such as the I* Eco.System.

Educated People can migrate to the NEW Peer-2-Peer Internet and escape

Jim Fleming 12.15.11 at 11:19 am

By the way…the PINK version of the .PINK Top-Level-Domain may be interesting…

8-bit Coding RGBbbbbb

The Official ZOOM://DNS 5-bit Alphabets

Jim Fleming 12.16.11 at 5:35 pm


Looks like the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has sent you a letter…

The new DNS software – derived largely from DNSMASQ which has nearly 100% market share should be able to handle the needed gTLD
expansion. No applicants will be needed or $185,000 fees.

Microsoft’s PNRP will also help play a role.

The Network is the Registry…with computers computing Trending TLDs…for .FREE…

Jim Fleming 12.19.11 at 12:47 pm

The NEW Peer-2-Peer DNS is NOT Applicant Based. There is NO IANA. There is NO Single Point of Control – such as the I* Eco.System.

Educated People can migrate to the NEW Peer-2-Peer Internet and escape

The Official ZOOM://DNS 5-bit Alphabets

To compute a UNIQUE 32-bit ASN without the IANA one simply encodes their 30-bit value using the 5-bit Alphabet and adds 1 in
the left and right bits. 1+30+1 = 32-bit FREE Unique Value

There are similar ways to compute .FREE IPv3 and IPv16 Address Space without the IANA…

Jim Fleming 12.20.11 at 12:31 pm

It looks like the U.S. Congress has now sent a letter requesting a DELAY in the new Top Level Domain programs.

Apparently, they have not been made aware of the Peer-2-Peer DNS technology that does not require IANA or “Applicants” (or $185,00 fees). Why is that ?

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Anti-spam image