A special Board retreat held in Trondheim, Norway, over the weekend led to a set of resolutions on the new gTLD program.
The resolutions mean to give ICANN Staff directions on how to edit the next version of the Draft Applicant Guidebook. Those looking for concrete answers to such outstanding issues as Vertical Integration (VI) of registrars and registries will have to wait a little longer. On this issue for example, the Board will request that the GNSO provide it with a clear statement on the current state of the work being done by the community and whether consensus has been reached. This statement should be sent to the Board by October 8th.
Other resolutions cover Morality and Public Order objections, Geographic Names or Trademark Protection.
There are also a couple of resolutions that aren't linked to the new gTLD program, including one naming San Francisco as the venue for the first ICANN meeting of 2011, from March 13 to 18 2011.
It should hardly come as a surprise. As the planned date for the release of the final version of ICANN's new gTLD Applicant Guidebook draws near (it is expected in advance of ICANN's Cartagena meeting in December), the calls for yet more delays can once again be heard.
The International Trademark Association (INTA) sent ICANN Chairman of the Board Peter Dengate Thrush and ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom a letter a few days ago requesting that yet another study be done before new gTLDs are rolled out!
The study should, they say, "assess the harms associated with intellectual property abuse and related forms of consumer fraud in the domain name system".
Thankfully, both Dengate Thrush and Beckstrom have lately made it quite clear that after several years of consultation and development of the new gTLD program, they feel that there has been ample opportunity for people such as INTA to get involved and have their say.
The Board has actually planned to concentrate solely on getting through as many of the remaining new gTLD issues as it can during its upcoming Retreat, on September 24 and 25.
Personally, I wonder whom INTA is really speaking for here. I know of several major corporations that are keen to get their hands on their own TLD and are growing very tired of the program's endless delays. And then obviously there are all the other entrepreneurs who have started on a TLD project and are loosing more and more money as delays stretch…