Home / Blogs

Inconsistencies in ICANN New TLD Application Fees

Michael D. Palage

In preparation for Monday's Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group call, I spent some time reviewing various documents in connection with what are ICANN's actual costs in reviewing top-level domain name applications. One thing that caught my attention was the following metric in Rod Beckstrom's most recent CEO Monthly One Page Metric Report. Specifically, that ICANN has processed 18 IDN ccTLD requests at an average cost of just over $7,000 per application. Although ICANN has billed $600K in connection with these 18 requests, it has only collected $132K in fees and already written off at least $50K as uncollectable.

In order to provide some "fact based" contributions to ICANN's bottom-up consensus driven multi-stakeholder model, I decide to submit the following DIDP to ICANN inquiring about it costs in connection with the IDN ccTLD program. I decided to submit this inquiry as well because it appears that this questions has been posed by others in the ICANN community.

Dear ICANN Staff,

This Document Information Disclosure Policy (DIDP) request is being made regarding information contained in the CEO Monthly One Page Metrics Report dated 15 July 2011. Specifically, the data regarding IDN Fast Track Billing Activity indicates that in connection with the 18 requests that ICANN has processed to date, ICANN has billed out $600K but only collected $132K. Given that there should be no difference between IDN ccTLDs and gTLDs when it comes to the safety security and stability of the Internet and the reliance upon which Internet users place in these TLDs, these CEO metric numbers raise some interesting questions:

  • Can ICANN please provide any documentation regarding its actual costs to process these 18 applications and what where the actual costs (internal and external)?
  • Was the $132K sufficient to process these applications?
  • If the $132K was sufficient to pay for the review of these 18 applications, can ICANN provide any documentation reconciling these reduced evaluation fees versus the proposes $185,000 fee for a "single gTLD" application?
  • If the $132K was not sufficient to process these applications, what funds did ICANN use to process these applications?
  • On page 114 of the October 2010 Board Briefing materials there is a document entitled "IDN ccTLD Financial Overview", prepared by then ICANN Staffer Tina Dam dated 20 October 2010. This document states that ICANN has already written off as "uncollectable" $50,000 of the $572,000 fees. Can ICANN provide an accounting of the total amount of fees in connection with IDN ccTLDs that have been written off as "uncollectable."
  • Once an IDN ccTLD application fee has been written off as "uncollectable" does this amount still appear in the IDN fees billed One Page Metrics Report?

For the avoidance of any doubt, please note that nothing in this DIDP request seeks to have ICANN identify those IDN ccTLD applicants that have not paid their fees or have had fees written off as uncollectable.

While ICANN has historically waited until the very last day of the thirty day window to post responses to DIDP requests, I would hope ICANN staff could expedite any portions of this request so that it can provide an important data point to the JAS WG teleconference scheduled for this upcoming Monday.

Best regards,

Michael Palage

By Michael D. Palage, Intellectual Property Attorney and IT Consultant

Related topics: ICANN, Internet Governance, Top-Level Domains

WEEKLY WRAP — Get CircleID's Weekly Summary Report by Email:

Comments

Beer. Kevin Murphy  –  Sep 16, 2011 2:16 PM PDT

If your answer comes before Monday, I'll buy you a beer.

I'll buy you a beer every day for the rest of your life.

To post comments, please login or create an account.

Related Blogs

Related News

Topics

Industry Updates – Sponsored Posts

How the dot-CO Domain Opened the Door to a New Era of Internet Innovation

Neustar Names Becky Burr as its Chief Privacy Officer

Application Filed for DOT BUDAPEST

New gTLD Informational Webinar on May 31

Call for Nominations to the Public Interest Registry .ORG Advisory Council

Oman Relaunches .om with the Support of ARI Registry Services

Domains Ending With .JP.NET Now Available to the General Public at Bargain Prices

Minds+Machines Wins Back-End Registry Services Contract For .BASKETBALL

.US Celebrates American Small Business, Surprises Unsuspecting Small Business Owner

Architelos Introduces 'Velocity' to Help TLDs Market in Evolving Domain Name Industry

Minds + Machines Will Host New dot Rugby gTLD

PIR Launches First-Ever .ORG Television Commercial In India

Minds and Machines Awarded DOT LONDON Contract

Internet Governance Update: Battle Royale Is Here

DotConnectAfrica Participates at ICANN 43 In Costa Rica, the "Rich Coast"

TLDH to Apply for .music

Minds + Machines Chosen for Dot MIAMI

.JP and .NET Domain Owners Set to Boost Online Presence With .JP.NET, the New Domain for Japan

Sedari Seeking Certainty in the ICANN TLD Process

Almost Half of Major Consumer Brands Set to Apply for a Dot Brand Top-Level Domain

Hot Topics

dotMobi

Mobile

Sponsored by
dotMobi
Neustar UltraDNS

DNS

Sponsored by
Neustar UltraDNS
Minds + Machines

Top-Level Domains

Sponsored by
Minds + Machines
Nominum

IPv6

Sponsored by
Nominum
Afilias

DNS Security

Sponsored by
Afilias
Verisign

Security

Sponsored by
Verisign