Approved Resolution | Meeting of the New gTLD Program Committee
Response to 17 June 2012 GAC Letter
Resolved (2012.07.27.NG01), the New gTLD Program Committee approves the sending of a response [PDF, 577 KB] to the Governmental Advisory Committee's (GAC's) 17 June 2012 letter regarding the New gTLD Program.
Rationale for Resolution 2012.07.27.NG01
On 17 June 2012, the GAC notified the Board of three items:
First: The GAC advises the Board to consult with the community as a matter of urgency to consider ways to improve its assessment and delegation processes in order to minimise the downside risks and uncertainty for applicants. In line with the concerns raised by the community, this should include a focus on competition and fairness with delegation timing. The GAC intends to address the issue of the digital archery and batching system at the Prague meeting with the Board.
Second: The GAC advises the Board that it is planning to issue any Early Warnings shortly after the Toronto ICANN meeting, in October 2012.
Third: The GAC advises the Board that it will not be in a position to offer any advice on new gTLD applications in 2012. For this reason, the GAC is considering the implications of providing any GAC advice on gTLD applications. These considerations are not expected to be finalised before the Asia-Pacific meeting in April 2013.
The Board responded to the first item above on 20 June 2012. The sending of the response as approved by the New gTLD Program Committee now provides the GAC with a response to the other two items above, and furthers ICANN's commitment to accountability and transparency. These items are also tracked on the recently-released Register of GAC advice. The communication to the GAC notes that the Board looks forward to receiving the results of GAC deliberations in timely fashion, and that ICANN's CEO will be reaching out to the GAC for further clarification on the intended timeframe for providing further advice.
Providing a response to the GAC has no financial impact on ICANN and will not negatively impact the systemic security, stability and resiliency of the domain name system.