Preliminary Report | Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee | 13 September 2012

Note: On 10 April 2012, the Board established the New gTLD Program Committee, comprised of all voting members of the Board that are not conflicted with respect to the New gTLD Program. The Committee was granted all of the powers of the Board (subject to the limitations set forth by law, the Articles of incorporation, Bylaws or ICANN's Conflicts of Interest Policy) to exercise Board-level authority for any and all issues that may arise relating to the New gTLD Program. The full scope of the Committee's authority is set forth in its charter at

Formal Minutes are still to be approved by the New gTLD Program Committee. This has not been approved by the New gTLD Program Committee and does not constitute minutes but does provide a preliminary attempt setting forth the unapproved reporting of the resolutions from that meeting. Details on voting and abstentions will be provided in the Minutes, when approved at a future meeting.

NOTE ON ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INCLUDED WITHIN PRELIMINARY REPORT – ON RATIONALES — Where available, a draft Rationale for each of the Board's actions is presented under the associated Resolution. A draft Rationale is not final until approved with the minutes of the Board meeting.

A Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board of Directors was held on 13 September 2012 at 5:00 p.m. local time in Los Angeles, California.

Committee Chairman Cherine Chalaby called the meeting to order.

In addition to the Chair the following Directors participated in all or part of the meeting: Akram Atallah, Chris Disspain, Bill Graham, Gonzalo Navarro, Ray Plzak, R. Ramaraj, George Sadowsky, Mike Silber, Judith Vazquez and Kuo-Wei Wu.

Thomas Narten, IETF Liaison, and Thomas Roessler, TLG Liaison, were also in attendance as non-voting liaisons to the committee.

Erika Mann sent apologies.

This is a preliminary report the Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee, which took place on 13 September 2012.

  1. Enhanced Protections for IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent Names

    The New gTLD Program Committee continued its discussion of a proposed resolution on enhanced protections for IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent Names. The Committee then took the following action:

    Whereas, the GAC Communiqué issued in Prague states that the GAC, "requires further clarification as to the status of its pending request for enhanced protections for the [International Olympic Committee] and Red Cross/Red Crescent names at the top and second levels, ..."

    Whereas, earlier GAC letters of 11 June 2011 and 12 April 2012 expressed the same advice that "the IOC and Red Cross and Red Crescent [names] should be protected at the first and second top levels, given that these organizations enjoy protection at both the international level through international treaties (e.g. the Nairobi Treaty and the Geneva Conventions) and through national laws in multiple jurisdictions. The GAC considers the existence of such two-tiered protection as creating the criteria relevant to determining whether any other entities should be afforded comparable enhanced protection."

    Whereas, the GNSO is actively engaged in policy discussion regarding second-level protections for the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names, and has convened a drafting team that is working on this issue, and is further considering initiating a PDP on the broader issue of whether to protect the names of international organizations in new gTLDS.

    Whereas, protections for the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names at the top-level are in place for the current round of new gTLDs.

    Whereas, the protections for the second level, if they are provided and if they are to be effective, should be in place before the delegation of the first new gTLDs.

    Whereas, the Board favors a conservative approach, that restrictions on second-level registration can be lifted at a later time, but restrictions cannot be applied retroactively after domain names are registered.

    Resolved, the Board thanks the GNSO for its continued attention and ongoing work on this topic, and requests that the GNSO continue its work on a policy recommendation on second-level protections for the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names on an expedited basis.

    Resolved (NG2012.09.13.01), if it is not possible to conclude the policy work prior to 31 January 2013, the Board requests that the GNSO Council advise the Board by no later than that date if it is aware of any reason, such as concerns with the global public interest or the security or stability of the DNS, that the Board should take into account in making its decision about whether to include second level protections for the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names listed in section of the Applicant Guidebook by inclusion on a Reserved Names List applicable in all new gTLD registries approved in the first round of the New gTLD Program.

    All members of the New gTLD Program Committee in attendance at the meeting voted in favor of Resolutions NG2012.09.13.01. One Committee member was not available to vote on the resolution. The resolution carried.

    Rationale for Resolution NG 2012.09.13.01

    The New gTLD Program Committee is undertaking this action now to remain accountable to all parts of its community. The New gTLD Program Committee recognizes all of the work that has been done to date on this issue, and the work that is currently underway. For example, a GNSO Drafting Team has already provided recommendations on protections at the top level, and work is continuing on reviewing protections at the second level. There is also work ongoing regarding the broader question of protections at the first and second level for Inter Governmental Organizations (IGO). Through this resolution, the New gTLD Program Committee is working to address the advice of the GAC regarding providing protections to the IOC and Red Cross/Red Crescent names at the second-level within the first round of New gTLDs. This action is not intended to preclude or supplant the ongoing policy work within the community, nor is it intended to direct the initiation of policy development work within the GNSO. The New gTLD Program Committee supports the continued work on these topics within the GNSO, and specifically limits the effect of this resolution to the first round of New gTLDs, to allow for further policy to be developed and implemented.

    This resolution is not expected to have an impact on ICANN's fiscal resources, nor Is it expected to impact the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS.

  2. Letter from Business Constituency on Objection Process

    The Committee discussed the letter received from the Business Constituency regarding the timing of the objection process.

    The Chair then called the meeting to a close.