Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
The IPC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the first final draft sections of the Next Round AGB. We note this significant milestone in the New gTLD Program, and appreciate ICANN Org’s efforts to keep to the current schedule for the Program, with anticipated launch of the application window in early 2026.
If no, please explain.
The IPC requests that the AGB draft language be revised to make it clear what the role of the SPIRT is in relationship to formulating solutions to problems, namely, “The SPIRT can only formulate solutions in conjunction with the GNSO Council.” It is not intended to be a decision-maker on its own. The draft language states that the SPIRT is expected to develop a “permanent solution” in some instances. In fact, the SPIRT is intended to operate as a “sorting mechanism” to assist in determining where an issue should be resolved and is, in all cases, under the supervision of the GNSO Council.
If no, please explain.
The draft AGB section states: “If there is more than one application for a string representing a certain Geographic Name as described in this section, and the applications have requisite government approvals, the applications will be suspended pending resolution by the applicants. If the applicants have not reached a resolution by either the date of the end of the application round (as announced by ICANN), or the date on which ICANN opens a subsequent application round, whichever comes first, the applications will be rejected and applicable refunds will be available to applicants according to the conditions described in section 1.5.” The IPC requests clarification on how applicants can resolve such conflicts between themselves in the event that ICANN bans private auctions.
IPC strongly recommends 2 clarifications in the guidebook. The first is clarification of the authority of the SPIRT by inserting the phrase, “The SPIRT can only formulate solutions in conjunction with the GNSO Council.” The draft language states that the SPIRT is expected to develop a “permanent solution” in some instances. I n fact, the SPIRT is intended to operate as a “sorting mechanism” to assist in determining where an issue should be resolved and is, in all cases, under the supervision of the GNSO Council. The second is to provide clarification on how applicants applying for certain geographic strings can resolve conflicts between themselves in the event that ICANN bans private auctions.