Home / Blogs

New Geographical Top-Level Domains and Auctions

Dirk Krischenowski

I was surprised by ICANN's "Economic Case for Auctions in New gTLDs" paper especially with view to the latest presentation on the new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) implementation process in Paris. That Paris presentation highlighted the protection of community interests such as religious organisations, geographically based communities or indigenous groups and suggested a preference of bona fide community-based applicants against pure generic applications for the same string (see New gTLD Implementation Model [PDF]).

Contrary to this the only text passage in the current paper where ICANN considered the community-based applicants is "a 25% bidding credit could be offered to community-based bidders whose community is located primarily in least-developed countries". This reminds me of the discussion on discounts for HIV medicine for less developed countries a couple of years ago, where pharmaceutical companies cut a very poor figure.

But anyway, let's see ICANN's paper on new gTLD auctions as an attempt to get valuable community feedback if auctions are the "one size fits all" way to allocate a gTLD in the case of contention.

I can only write on behalf of the .berlin (dotBERLIN) application, but my ideas as to "what would happen in the case of more than one application" could also apply to other Geographical Top-Level Domains (GeoTLDs) like .paris, .cym or .africa. Let's assume that there is one applicant with the backing of the TLD community concerned and legally located in the country of that community and another applicant with no community support and located in another country. What could happen?

  1. A view on ICANNs' Evaluation Process flow chart [PDF] reveals that right after posting of the applications the Objection Filing Phase starts. One of the objection criteria is the Community Objection. This is the first turning point where the applicant with no community support can be kicked out of the game if some established institutions for the community file a well founded objection.
  2. The second turning point is the Governmental Advisory Board decision. Every applicant for a geographical or geopolitical string knows that a GeoTLD might only be granted if the relevant government agrees with the application. I could hardly imagine that the German government and the Berlin authorities would not object to another .berlin applicant from a country abroad and with no relation to a location with the name Berlin.

Even if both applicants have passed the objection process and the applicant with no community support wins an auction there might be pitfalls like intellectual property rights that can prevent the successful applicant to open up the target market successfully.

Depending on national and international legislations there might also be cases where one of the applicants makes itself liable for the costs associated with an artificial prolonging the application process, for instance if he acts in bad faith.

The auction model would clearly prefer a tax haven based applicant with deep pockets who applies for all of the most valuable city strings like .bejing, .nyc, .tokyo, .london, .paris, .berlin at the same time. I cannot imagine that ICANN aims to create such a diplomatic nightmare. Especially in the case of governmental objections ICANN will be very careful and will do everything to avoid diplomatic implications between countries.

Therefore the only case where I can imagine the auction model to be an appropriate mechanism to allocate a GeoTLD string is if there are two applicants, both from the same country and with support of the community and government. But in any case the best solution would be if both applicants find an agreement to cooperate.

By Dirk Krischenowski, Founder and CEO of dotBERLIN GmbH & Co. KG. Visit the blog maintained by Dirk Krischenowski here.

Related topics: ICANN, Top-Level Domains

Get a weekly summary of postings to CircleID:

 Master Feed (more feeds)      Twitter      Mobile
Bookmark / Email This Post

Comments

To post comments, please login or create an account.

Related Blogs

Domain Registrars & Registries: Don't Say You Weren't Warned

EoWhy?

Perspectives on a DNS-CERT

"Thin Brand Line" Breaks as Canon Announces Plans for .CANON

EI, EI - NO!

Related News

Other Topics

Access Providers Broadband Censorship Cloud Computing Cyberattack Cybercrime Cybersquatting Data Center DNS DNSSEC Domain Names Domain Registries Email Enum ICANN Internet Governance Internet Protocol IP Addressing IPTV IPv6 Law Malware Mobile Multilinguism Net Neutrality P2P Policy & Regulation Privacy Regional Registries Security Spam Telecom Top-Level Domains VoIP Web White Space Whois Wireless



Industry Updates – Sponsored Posts

.ORG, The Public Interest Registry Celebrates Its 25th Year With 8 Million Registrations

.ORG: Introducing Fully Internationalized Domain Names

.ORG to Fully Deploy DNSSEC in June

SPECIAL: Updates from the ICANN Meetings in Nairobi

.ORG Registrations in 2009 Grew 8.4 Percent Over Previous Year

Announcement: dotMobi Ownership

Afilias Limited Acquires .Mobi Domain Registry, Expands Market Leadership

ICANN and Cybersecurity: Hot Topics at The First Ever .ORG Forum

Using .ORG Directory to Find Haiti Relief Organizations

Afilias Releases .INFO Domain 2009 Annual Report

Expressions of Interest a Requirement for New gTLDs?

Neustar Implements DNS Security Extensions in the .US Registry

Registry Stakeholder Group Comments on Latest ICANN Policies

dotMobi Is Now a Member of The LACTLD

Afilias Announces Winners of the 2009 .INFO Awards

Vote for the Best .INFO Web Site Of 2009

.ORG Highlighted for Success in Fighting Phishing

SPECIAL: Updates from the ICANN Meetings in Seoul

.ORG Wins WebAward for Website Redesign and Selected as a Finalist for the NonProfit PR Awards

Afilias Announces 2009 .INFO Award Judges Panel