29 Rights Protection Mechanisms

Prototypical answer:

The Registry is committed to a comprehensive strategy on Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPM). The Registry works closely with DotAsia Organisation (through Namesphere) and draws from the successful experience and knowledge of the RPM measures implemented for the .ASIA, especially in its acclaimed Sunrise process and its contributions to rapid suspension policies.

29.1 Sunrise and Startup Processes

A comprehensive Sunrise and startup process is the key to successful RPMs. A successful Sunrise program not only provides priority to rights holders, but also sends a clear message to the market that the TLD is serious about RPMs, thereby further deterring abusive registrations.

The Sunrise process provides for the introduction of the TLD in an orderly and equitable manner. Its purpose is to give reasonable protection and priority to stakeholders and certain prior rights holders, as well as to deter abusive and bad faith registrations. The Sunrise policies are also designed to facilitate reliability for ICANN Accredited Registrars and fair competition amongst registrants. It is intended to create a stable and effective launch and registration process for the benefit of various stakeholders and the Internet community at large.

Learning from the successful experience of the .ASIA sunrise, which achieved 0 disputes and also 100% satisfaction (satisfied or very satisfied) in an online poll of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) practitioners, the Registry will implement a thorough and multi-phased Sunrise and startup process similar to that of the .ASIA registry.

A comprehensive set of Sunrise policies will be put in place in addition to the standard Sunrise and Trademark Claims services as specified in SPECIFICATION 7: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISMS, of the New gTLD Registry Agreement. The Sunrise policies will follow a similar framework of the .ASIA Sunrise Policies (http:⁄⁄dot.asia⁄policies⁄DotAsia-Sunrise-Policies--COMPLETE-2007-08-10.pdf), in so far as it does not conflict with the specification 7.

29.1.1 Standard Sunrise and Trademark Claims Services

As a basic commitment, the Registry will implement the requirements from Specification 7 of the New gTLD Registry Agreement, and in accordance to the relevant Trademark Clearing House (TMCH) Sunrise and Trademark Claims services.

For this standard Sunrise, the Registry will establish, at a minimum, the eligibility requirements verified by Clearinghouse data, and incorporate a Sunrise Dispute Resolution ⁄ Challenge Policy. The standard Sunrise eligibility requirements include: (i) ownership of a mark that satisfies the criteria set forth in section 7.2 of the Trademark Clearing House specifications, (ii) description of international class of goods or services covered by registration; (iii) representation that all provided information is true and correct; and (iv) provision of data sufficient to document rights in the trademark.

The Registry believes that these form only the very basic layer of RPM and will therefore add significant measures on top of the standard process to ensure that prior rights of others are not abused.

In terms of Sunrise, Specification 7 and the TMCH descriptions only provide a basic framework for Trademark holders to protect names that are identical to their trademark. The Registry believes that additional protection is important and can be efficiently and effectively put in place with a multi-phased Sunrise program. Further discussion about this is included in 29.1.4 below.

29.1.2 Auction Process

An important part of the success of the .ASIA Sunrise program is the use of auction in the resolution of contention. It is known that many Trademarks are similar or identical because of the different jurisdictions and different classes. Therefore, it is inevitable that there would be some competition among rights holders to certain names. A complete Sunrise program requires a contention resolution mechanism that works to reduce the tension of competition and resolve the issue in a stable and orderly manner.

When the .ASIA Sunrise Auction process was first introduced, the community was worried about possible high prices in the auctions making it costly for trademark holders. The results of the process demonstrate however the original intent prevailed. If a pure first-come-first-served model is used, the tension at the opening of the registry at the Sunrise period would be extremely high. Also, because of the competition, the so-called FCFS approach essentially becomes a lottery and one that favours registrars with systems in closer proximity to the registry servers. The tension and the inherent unjust of the process caused thousands of disputes and litigation in previous launches of TLDs utilizing such an approach.

In the .ASIA Sunrise process, a total of about 30,000 applications were received. Out of which less than 2% ended up in an auction. Furthermore, only about 40% ended up in a contested auction (i.e. that there was more than 1 bid in the auction). What that means is that, while it demonstrated clearly that there is certainly competition among trademark holders, it only represents a very small portion. Also, when there was more than one verified applicant for a Sunrise domain and an auction is setup, many trademark holders elect not to bid for the name. Based on the understanding from DotAsia, it is found that many trademark holders do know that their mark is “shared” by other companies, perhaps in different jurisdiction or in different categories. Their motivation to participate in the Sunrise is to avoid abuse of their mark by other parties. Because in the Sunrise process, before an auction is held, each of the verified applicants will be given the information of the other verified applicants in the auction ahead of time. They therefore know who else is bidding for the name and can evaluate whether the other party may in fact abuse their mark. Knowing that the other party is another legitimate trademark holder who may not be abusing their mark, many of the trademark holders elected not to bid and let the other party win the auction with a nominal bid at $10.

What this illustrates is that the auction process is a very successful tool in reducing the stress of the people and the systems in the launch of a registry. Overall, the average winning price of the auctions in the .ASIA startup process was less than US$200. That represents a significant cost benefit for rights holders in comparison to possible litigation or alternative dispute resolution proceedings.

29.1.3 Sunrise Challenge (Dispute Resolution) Process

Besides a contention resolution process, an important part of any Sunrise process is a well developed Sunrise Challenge Process to ensure the integrity of the Sunrise program. The Sunrise Challenge Process is important such that after the allocation of a Sunrise name, there is a period of time where legitimate rights owners can challenge the legitimacy and eligibility of a registrant based on the Sunrise policies to a domain name.

Following again the .ASIA experience, a comprehensive Sunrise Challenge (Dispute Resolution) Process will be put in place and a dispute resolution provider will be selected to arbitrate disputes. A sample of the .ASIA Sunrise Challenge Process is included in the Attached. As part of the requirement of Specification 7 of the new gTLD Registry Agreement, An SDRP will be adopted to allow any party to raise a challenge on at least the four grounds identified in the Applicant Guidebook at TMCH s6.2.4. The remedy will be cancellation or deletion of a successfully challenged domain name. All registrants will be required to submit to proceedings under the SDRP, which will specify that SDRP claims may be raised after registration of a sunrise domain and will require that complaints clearly identify the challenger, the challenged domain, and the ground⁄s on which the complaint is based.

29.1.4 Additional Protection Mechanisms for Sunrise

In addition to the basic “identical” match of a Trademark to a domain name applied for during the Sunrise period, the Registry intends to follow the successful example of .ASIA to include additional types of matches, for example:
- Exceptions for registered mark (tm, sm, etc.) type or entity type (ltd, inc, etc.) identifiers
- Exceptions for the TLD string (i.e. allowing marks containing the TLD string to omit that substring)
- Considerations for commonly used short forms and omission of locality indications
- Acceptance of standard Romanization and Transliterations for Company Names
- Extended protection for trademarks + the class of the trademark (e.g. “BRAND Shoes” or “BRAND Computers”, etc.)

These considerations allow trademark holders priority registration opportunity to protect names that are important and related to them.

29.1.5 Community Sunrise Considerations

The Registry will also develop specialized phases targeted to provide priority registration periods for the community that the Registry will be primarily serving. For example, in the .ASIA Sunrise, Asian businesses and registered companies are allowed to participate in one of the phases of the Sunrise program ahead of the general availability of the domain. This allowed many Asian businesses who may not have a registered trademark to make use of the Sunrise process to protect their name.

For .spa, three additional sets of considerations will be considered:

29.1.5.1 Primary Community Considerations

The primary community has been described in #20c, and can be clearly delineated based on the response in #20e A) Eligibility. In summary:
- Spa operators, professionals and practitioners
- Spa associations and their members around the world
- Spa products and services manufacturers and distributors

A special phase in the Sunrise, before the general standard trademark Sunrise, should be afforded to allow the primary community a priority to register names corresponding to their spa related operations.

In order to be eligible for Sunrise as a community member, the registrant must be able to provide information⁄data demonstrating that they have:
1. A valid operating license, where applicable;
2. A spa, beauty or wellness certification, where applicable;
3. A valid business registration;
4. A membership with any spa or wellness industry association;
5. A declaration that the domain will be used for the promotion of spas and wellness related products or services.

For community organizations, such as spa associations, to be eligible, the registrant must be able to provide information⁄data substantiating that they have:
1. A valid entity registration, or equivalent;
2. Proof that the organization accepts members from the spa and wellness community; and,
3. A declaration that the domain will be used for the promotion of the spa and wellness community.

Furthermore, primary community members whose name itself contains the word “spa” should be able to omit that word for the second level domain name applied for under the “.spa” TLD. For example a spa with the name “ABCD Spa” should be able to apply for “abcd.spa” with the domain name applied for being considered an acceptable match to their entity name. This is similar to section 3.3.4 Exceptions for the term “Asia” in the .ASIA Sunrise Policies (http:⁄⁄dot.asia⁄policies⁄DotAsia-Sunrise-Policies--COMPLETE-2007-08-10.pdf).

29.1.5.2 Secondary Community Considerations

(From #20) The secondary community generally also includes holistic and personal wellness centers and organizations. While these secondary community organizations do not relate directly to the operation of spas, they nevertheless often overlap with and participate in the spa community and may share certain benefits for the utilization of the .spa domain. Together the industry calls it generally the “spa and wellness” community. In this document, we will use both “spa and wellness community” as well as “spa community”.

A special phase in the Sunrise, together with or after the general standard trademark Sunrise, should be afforded to allow the secondary community a priority to register names corresponding to their spa related operations before Landrush. This could be handled similar to Sunrise 3 of the .ASIA Sunrise process (http:⁄⁄dot.asia⁄policies⁄DotAsia-Sunrise-Policies--COMPLETE-2007-08-10.pdf), with requirements and processes similar to Primary Community members (except with a lower priority).

29.1.5.3 Coincidental Usage Considerations

(From #22) Based on the research as described in #20d, we recognize that there is coincidental usage of the string “spa” in other contexts beyond its predominant meaning. For completeness in mitigating against abusive usage of the .spa TLD based on such coincidental usage, the Registry will put in place 3 key measures to address potential concerns:
1. Reserved Names List
2. Special Sunrise Consideration
3. Claim & Notification Mechanism

Some details have already been included in the response to #22.

These RPMs are especially put in place to ensure that the prior rights of those who may be unintentionally implicated also be considered and protected.

For the set of reserved names put in place and added to the Reserved Names List, an ongoing activation mechanism similar to Sunrise 1 of the .ASIA Sunrise policies (http:⁄⁄dot.asia⁄policies⁄DotAsia-Sunrise-Policies--COMPLETE-2007-08-10.pdf) which is also an ongoing process for the activation of governmental reserved names.

If special Sunrise Considerations are included, i.e. if a phase of the .spa Sunrise would allow for entities for which coincidental usage of the string “spa” has an implicative meaning for them to apply for their corresponding name under .spa during Sunrise, then a mixture of a similar mechanism as .ASIA Sunrise 1 (for the activation of reserved names based on the Town of Spa in Belgium) and .ASIA Sunrise 3 (for application of registered entity name in Italy, i.e. registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A.) could be utilized.

Especially for registered “Società Per Azioni” (i.e. S.p.A.) companies, the .spa Registry is prepared to work closely with the relevant authorities in Italy to explore the best approach to minimize unintended conflicts and⁄or circumventive abuse of .spa domains.

Such measures could include at one end of the spectrum to reserve all registered “Società Per Azioni” (i.e. S.p.A.) to another end of the spectrum where registrations are open and standard RPM of UDRP and URS are relied upon.

The Registry believes it is most appropriate to work with GAC and hear from GAC any further advice, if any, before completing the policy development process for the .spa TLD, especially for the Sunrise process involving coincidental usage of the TLD string “spa”. It is also important to maintain a balance where the primary community for the .spa TLD is not disenfranchised.

As a strawman proposal, the Registry suggests the following framework for handling the overlap with registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A. entities:
1. Initially reserve all registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A. entity names during Sunrise and Landrush
2. Allow activation of the names through a special Sunrise process
3. Continue to reserve all registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A. entity names for 18 months from Go Live of the .spa TLD (and allow for ongoing activation by such entities)
4. Release the reservations and put in place a claims and notification process for another 6 months to ensure that new .spa registrants are aware if their registered .spa domain name may overlap with a registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A., and that the registered “Società Per Azioni”, i.e. S.p.A. is notified of such registration.

This should provide a suitable balance that would ensure a stable and orderly introduction of the .spa TLD with due consideration for the protection of coincidental usage of the string “S.p.A” without compromising the long term development of the spa and wellness community .spa TLD.

Finally, it is important to note that all .spa registrants must still adhere to the mandatory guidelines and remain consistent with the community purpose of the .spa TLD, especially in promoting positive energy and a highly ethical, professional and tolerant attitude balanced with vigilant measures against abusive behaviours and described in #20d and #20e.

29.1.6 Reconsideration and Amendments Process

Besides the multitude of provisions for rights holders to participate in the Sunrise process, another important feature of the success of the .ASIA Sunrise program is the inclusion of a built-in reconsideration and amendment process. Because of the many applications a trademark holder may need to be filing, especially considering in the future the many new gTLD launches, it is possible that clerical mistakes and errors could be made in the Sunrise application. The .ASIA Sunrise process included a built-in reconsideration and amendment process that was critical to the overall success of the program. The success rate of the .ASIA Sunrise applications was over 90% as compared to other previous Sunrise launches where the success rate may be closer to 50-60%.

This explains the high approval rating of the .ASIA Sunrise program and also the rationale for the Registry to learn from and follow the good example set by .ASIA in the development of its comprehensive Sunrise policies.

29.1.7 Proactive Outreach and Specialized Programs

Furthermore, on top of the Sunrise program, a Pioneer Domains Program will be put in place to provide even further protection for prior rights holders while maintaining a strong balance against users’ rights.

Two features of the Pioneer programs for rights holders include: 1) the ability to apply for typo or other variant forms of their trademark to improve protection; 2) the use of the Pioneer Domains Challenge process to protect against abuse.

Again, following from the success of the .ASIA startup processes, the Registry intends to put in place a Pioneer Domains Program similar to the .ASIA Pioneer Domains Program (http:⁄⁄pioneer.domains.asia⁄ascii⁄policies.html). Together with the Pioneer Domains Program, a Pioneer Domains Challenge Process will be put in place (http:⁄⁄pioneer.domains.asia⁄ascii⁄challenge.html).

In short, the Pioneer Domains Program invites potential registrants to submit proposals, explaining how they would use and promote the domain name. Each proposal will require an application fee and prior acknowledgment and acceptance of relevant terms and conditions. Evaluation criteria will take into account the applicantʹs business plan, marketing expertise, and the manner and purposes for which the proposed site would be operated. For Trademark applicants, the evaluation criteria is based on the trademarks filed and the rights holder can also apply for variations relevant to their mark.

29.1.8 Additional RPM Considerations

In addition to the RPMs mandated by the Applicant Guidebook, certain requirements proposed in the ‘2011 Proposed Security, Stability and Resiliency Requirements for Financial TLDs’ (at http:⁄⁄www.icann.org⁄en⁄news⁄correspondence⁄aba-bits-to-beckstrom-crocker-20dec11-en.pdf) (the ‘BITS Requirements) will be adopted. We acknowledge that these requirements were developed by the financial services sector in relation to financial TLDs, but nevertheless believe that their adoption in this TLD (which is not financial-related) results in a more robust approach to combating abuse. The following requirements will be adopted:
Req. 6: annual certification to ICANN of compliance with the Registry Agreement.
Req. 8: provision and maintenance of valid Registry Operator primary contact information (name, email address, and phone number) on the registry website.
Req. 10: re-validation of Registry-Registrar Agreements at least annually.
Req. 13: immediate notification to Registrars regarding any RPM investigation or compliance action including the nature of the investigation or compliance action by ICANN or any outside party.
The Registry-Registrar Agreement (RRA) will additionally impose upon Registrars the following requirements:
Req. 7: Annual certification to ICANN compliance with the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA).
Req. 9: Provision and maintenance of valid primary contact information (name, email address, and phone number) on Registrar’s website.
Req. 19: Disclosure of registration requirements on Registrar’s website.

29.2 UDRP, URS and other Suspension Processes

While the Startup process, including the multi-phased Sunrise program provides a proactive process for prior rights holders to protect their names under the TLD in a priority registration process, RPMs after the allocation and delegation of a second level domain under the TLD is equally important.

29.2.1 UDRP Implementation

The Registry will comply with and put in place mechanisms to ensure the enforcement of UDRP decisions. These include provisions within the Registry-Registrar Agreements (RRA) with Accredited Registrars to ensure that they have adequate provisions in their Registration agreement with registrants to submit to UDRP proceedings, as well as to work closely with Accredited registrars in the implementation of UDRP decisions and required actions through the URS process.

29.2.2 URS Implementation

The URS is a new RPM the implementation of which is mandated in all new gTLDs. The URS is targeted at providing a rapid takedown solution to clear-cut cases of cybersquatting. It is intended to have a deterrent effect and reduce the number of UDRP disputes. The URS is intended to supplement and not replace the UDRP, and the Applicant Guidebook foreshadows (at URS ss8.6 & 13) the likelihood of URS claimants also commencing UDRP claims. For this reason the URS Implementation Plan considers potential interaction between URS and UDRP stakeholders. The following stakeholders are involved in implementation of the URS:
– URS claimants
– Registrants
– Registrars
– Registry operator
– ARI
– URS provider⁄s
– URS Examiner
The roles of these stakeholders are described below by reference to:
– URS Implementation Plan
– Contractual implementation

The URS Implementation Plan identifies certain aspects of implementation that are not clearly addressed in the Applicant Guidebook. For example, the Guidebook does not specify how from an operational perspective suspension of a domain name will transform to another status (e.g., transfer of a domain following a successful UDRP challenge); we assume that such a status change would only occur upon expiry of a registration but acknowledge the potential for further development of URS policy to allow for change of status as a result of a subsequent UDRP decision. In addition to identifying such gaps, the URS Implementation Plan identifies our proposed method of addressing these. Furthermore, understanding that a fundamental aim of the URS is expediency, all steps in the Implementation Plan below will be undertaken as soon as practical but without compromising security or accuracy.

29.2.2.1 Implementation

URS Implementation Plan

1. As an initial step, ARI will notify to each URS provider an email address for all URS-related filings and other correspondence. On an ongoing basis, ARI’s Abuse and Compliance Team will monitor this address for communications from URS providers. ARI will validate all correspondence received from a URS provider.
2. ARI will within 24 hours of receipt of a URS Notice of Complaint lock the domain name⁄s the subject of complaint by restricting all changes to the registration data, including transfer and deletion of the domain name. The domain name will continue to resolve while in this locked status.
3. ARI will immediately notify the URS provider in the manner requested by the URS provider once the domain name⁄s have been locked.
4. Upon receipt of a favourable URS Determination ARI will lock the domain name the subject of the Determination for the balance of the registration period and redirect the nameservers to an informational web page provided by the URS provider. While a domain name is locked, ARI will continue to display all of the WhoIs information of the original registrant except for the redirection of the nameservers and (subject to future policy development taking into account the transfer of a URS-locked domain name following a successful UDRP challenge) the additional statement that the domain will not be able to be transferred, deleted or modified for the life of the registration.
5. Upon receipt of notification from the URS provider of termination of a URS proceeding ARI will promptly unlock the domain and return full control to the registrant.
6. Where a default has occurred (in accordance with the Applicant Guidebook at URS s6.1) and a Determination has been made in favour of the complainant, in the event that ARI receives notice from a URS provider that a Response has been filed in accordance with s6.4, ARI will as soon as practical restore a domain name to resolve to the original IP address while preserving its locked status until a Determination from de novo review is notified to ARI.
7. ARI will ensure that no changes are made to the resolution of a domain name the subject of a successful URS Determination until expiry of the registration or the additional registration year unless otherwise instructed by UDRP provider.
8. ARI will make available to successful URS complainants an optional extension of the registration period for one additional year at commercial rates. We understand that this requirement has been based on the provision in the Expired Domain Deletion Policy (3.7.5.7 of the 2009 RAA), under which there is no requirement to notify the complainant that a name is due to expire. From this we conclude that there is likewise no requirement on this TLD to notify a successful URS complainant that a name is due to expire.
9. The Applicant Guidebook specifies that renewal must be offered ‘at commercial rates’ but does not specify how and to whom the renewal payment should be made. If payment is to be made to a stakeholder other than the registry operator, it is not clear how this will be received by the registry operator. ARI’s Abuse and Compliance Team will be prepared and have the expertise and flexibility necessary to develop the technical and financial interfaces necessary to facilitate the receipt of renewal fees by ARI.

Contractual Implementation

The following features of the URS Implementation Plan described above will be executed by inclusion of corresponding clauses in the RRA:
– In the event that a registrant does not submit an answer to a URS complaint in accordance with the Applicant Guidebook at URS s6.1 (default), Registrars must prevent registrants from making changes to the WhoIs information of a registration in default.
– Registrars must prevent changes to a domain in locked status to ensure that both the Registrar’s systems and registry’s systems contain the same information for the locked domain.
– Registrars must not take any action relating to a URS proceeding except as in accordance with a validated communication from ARI or a URS provider.

29.2.3 Other Suspension Programs

In addition to the basic dispute and suspension programs, the Abuse Prevention Mechanisms as described in #28 as well as the geographical names reservation processes described in #22, the Registry, following the footsteps of the .ASIA Registry as well, will explore appropriate suspension mechanisms and challenge processes to further improve the protection to prior rights holders.

For example, .ASIA has completed an MoU with the International Federation Against Copyrights Theft Greater China (IFACT-GC), and has explored extensively and works closely with the Anti-Phishing Working Group on possible alternative rapid suspension processes against gross copyright infringement and phishing sites. These discussions also helped inform some of the discussions that lead to the development of the URS.

Given the focus of the TLD, the Registry will also consider and explore adopting other relevant forums for domain dispute resolution. For example, the Registry may explore the adoption of other industry arbitration processes relevant to the use to broaden the protection of the legitimate prior rights of others in the registration of domain names in the TLD. These measures will be put in place in addition to not in replacement of and must not be in conflict of the basic requirements of submitting to UDRP, URS and other ICANN policies.

29.2.4 Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Process (PDDRP)

While the Registry is confident that its processes and policies will be effective in curbing abusive registrations, and that it has the knowledge and capabilities to implement and enforce such measures, the Registry is fully prepared to work with ICANN should a PDDRP be initiated.

The Registry fully submits to the process and, along with its Backend Registry Services Provider as well as Front End Registry Services Provider, will comply with all ICANN requirements through a PDDRP.

29.2.5 ARI Abuse and Compliance Team

ARI’s Abuse and Compliance Team will be staffed by five full-time equivalent positions:
– 4 Policy Compliance Officers
– 1 Legal Manager
Policy Compliance Officers will be responsible for managing sunrise and landrush applications, supporting the SDRP, TM Claims Service, URS, UDRP and Trademark PDDRP, managing communications with the TMCH, receiving, assessing and managing trademark infringement complaints received through the single abuse point of contact, escalating complaints and issues to the Legal Manager when necessary and communicating with all relevant stakeholders (Registrars, registrants, trademark holders, general public) as needed in fulfilling these responsibilities. This role will be provided on a 24⁄7 basis supported outside of ordinary business hours by ARI’s Service Desk. Policy Compliance Officers will be required to have the following skills⁄qualifications: customer service⁄fault handling experience, complete knowledge of all RPMs offered by the TLD and related policies, Internet industry knowledge, relevant post-secondary qualification, excellent communication and professional skills, accurate data entry skills, high-level problem solving skills, and high-level computer skills.

The Legal Manager will be responsible for handling all potential disputes arising in connection with RPMs and related policies. This will involve assessing complaints and issues, liaising with legal counsel and management, resolving disputes and communicating with all relevant stakeholders (Registrars, registrants, trademark holders, general public) as needed in fulfilling these responsibilities. The Legal Manager will be required to have the following skills⁄qualifications: legal background (in particular, intellectual property⁄information technology law) or experience with relevant tertiary or post-graduate qualifications, dispute resolution experience, Internet industry experience, excellent communication, negotiation, problem solving and professional skills and good computer skills.

For more information on the skills and responsibilities of these roles, please see the in-depth resources section in response to Question 31. Based on the projections and the experience of ARI, the resources described here are more than sufficient to accommodate the needs of this TLD.

29.3 Meeting & Exceeding Requirements

29.3.1 Capabilities and Knowledge

The Registry is supported by Namesphere as the Front-End Services provider, and works closely with DotAsia Organisation (through Namesphere) to develop the Sunrise and Startup processes as well as agreements and other administrative proceedings to ensure effective, efficient and implementable enforcement of such policies and processes.

DotAsia has significant knowledge and expertise in the development and successful implementation of Sunrise and RPM policies, as demonstrated by the successful launch of the .ASIA TLD. A dedicated team comprised of DotAsia, the Registry and our Registry Back-End Services Provider will be convened to ensure that policy as well as technical capabilities are in place to support the RPMs.

29.3.2 Compliance with Specification 7

The Registry is committed to comply with Specification 7 of the New gTLD Registry Agreement, and plans to implement additional RPM on top of the basic requirements of Specification 7.

29.3.3 Plans for Meeting Compliance with Contractual Requirements

The Registry, along with its Front-End Services Provider and Back-End Services Provider will work to ensure that contractual compliance is met. Besides the basic requirements in Specification 7, the Registry intends to consult with ICANN through the process as additional RPMs are put in place to ensure that they also comply with contractual requirements. With the strong experience from our partners, especially from DotAsia, the Registry can be assured that it will meet and comply with all the ICANN contractual requirements.

The following will be memorialized and be made binding via the Registry-Registrar and Registrar-Registrant Agreements:

The registry may reject a registration request or a reservation request, or may delete, revoke, suspend, cancel, or transfer a registration or reservation under the following criteria:
a. to enforce registry policies and ICANN requirements; each as amended from time to time;
b. that is not accompanied by complete and accurate information as required by ICANN requirements and⁄or registry policies or where required information is not updated and⁄or corrected as required by ICANN requirements and⁄or registry policies;
c. to protect the integrity and stability of the registry, its operations, and the TLD system;
d. to comply with any applicable law, regulation, holding, order, or decision issued by a court, administrative authority, or dispute resolution service provider with jurisdiction over the registry;
e. to establish, assert, or defend the legal rights of the registry or a third party or to avoid any civil or criminal liability on the part of the registry and⁄or its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, representatives, employees, contractors, and stockholders;
f. to correct mistakes made by the registry or any accredited registrar in connection with a registration; or
g. as otherwise provided in the Registry-Registrar Agreement and⁄or the Registrar-Registrant Agreement.

29.3.4 Consistency with Technical, Operational and Financial Approach

The use of pendingCreate along with other registry system features ensure that Sunrise and other startup processes could be processed in a standards based manner. In addition, DotAsia has helped to work out an open EPP extension for the implementation of Sunrise applications:

These EPP Extensions include:
• An 〈ipr:name〉 element that indicates the name of Registered Mark.
• An 〈ipr:number〉 element that indicates the registration number of the IPR.
• An 〈ipr:ccLocality〉 element that indicates the origin for which the IPR is established (a national or international trademark registry).
• An 〈ipr:entitlement〉 element that indicates whether the applicant holds the trademark as the original “OWNER”, “CO-OWNER” or “ASSIGNEE”.
• An 〈ipr:appDate〉 element that indicates the date the Registered Mark was applied for.
• An 〈ipr:regDate〉 element that indicates the date the Registered Mark was issued and registered.
• An 〈ipr:class〉 element that indicates the class of the registered mark.
• An 〈ipr:type〉 element that indicates the Sunrise phase the application applies for.

Note that some of these extensions might be subject to change based on ICANN-developed requirements for the Trademark Clearinghouse and also specific implementation of the Sunrise process at the Registry.

29.3.5 Committed Resource to Carry out plans

Both ARI and Namesphere as the Registry Back-End and Registry Front-End Services provider respectively have teams prepared and dedicated with capacity and capability to implement a comprehensive Sunrise and Startup process as well as the additional RPM measures that the Registry intends to put in place.

29.3.6 Rights Protection as A Core Objective

Based on the in depth discussion and commitment to the multitude of RPM features as well as a multi-phased startup process to ensure the stable and orderly introduction of the TLD, the Registry believes that it has demonstrated its commitment to rights protection as a core objective.

Beyond RPMs, the comprehensive geographical names protection program as explained in #22 further demonstrates the dedication of the Registry towards the protection of the prior rights of others.

29.3.7 Effective Mechanisms in Addition to Requirements in Registry Agreement

The policies and processes proposed by the Registry are proven and time tested to be effective in curbing abusive registrations. The .ASIA sunrise processes were highly regarded by the industry and yielded 100% satisfaction rating from an online poll of Intellectual Property Rights practitioners.

Much of the approach has been tested and proven successful through the launch of the .ASIA TLD. The success of the process can be observed by the imitation or following of the processes, including the multi-phased startup, the auction based contention resolution, as well as the Pioneer Domains Program (i.e. an Request for proposal -- RFP -- type process) are now commonly used processes when a TLD is launched or certain section of names are released by a TLD (e.g. 1 and 2 character names in existing gTLDs).

Similar gTLD applications: (5)