gTLD	Full Legal Name	E-mail suffix	Detail
.art	Dadotart, Inc.	deviantart.com	View

18.3.1 What operating rules will you adopt to eliminate or minimize social costs (e.g., time or financial resource costs, as well as various types of consumer vulnerabilities)?

Dadotart believes the proposed operating rules that undertake to initially reserve key names including trademarks, as well as its proposed policies on eligibility, name selection and name use will provide clarity and predictability to name registration, thereby reducing social costs. In full operation the .ART gTLD will provide a trusted online environment for the arts community. There should be no need for other trademark and brand owners to defensively register in the gTLD. This verified eco-system also provides consumers with a single trusted source for arts information and communication. Dadotart also believes that the safeguards set forth in the Applicant Guidebook and the proposed business modeled outlined in Sections 18.1 and 18.1.2 and the policies planned and noted in 18.2.4 will minimize and potential negative social costs.


18.3.2 What other steps will you take to minimize negative consequences⁄costs imposed upon consumers?
Dadotart believes that the proposed operation of the .ART gTLD as set forth in this application has no known negative consequences or cost implications for consumers. To the contrary, the proposed operation of this registry will likely lead to direct and quantifiable benefits to consumers. Dadotart believes that by following the core values as identified in Section 18.2 it will be able provide real value to the consumer and minimize any potential negative consequences⁄costs.

More particularly, the three phases of PAB creation, pre-launch, and launch and ongoing registration of the .ART gTLD are designed to minimize social costs and negative externalities. They protect potential registrants and potentially affected parties while maximizing the value of the name space to its registrants and users.

This approach is based on the premise that extensive screening efforts by the registry in the early stages will create a fair and orderly name space with lower compliance costs in the long term.

18.3.3 How will multiple applications for a particular domain name be resolved, for example, by auction or on a first-come⁄first-serve basis?
In phases and areas where the first-come-first-served principle tends to yield perverse results, alternative modes will be used.

(1) In the PAB creation phase community research will identify names to be entered into reserved lists and the rules by which they will be allocated;
(2) In the pre-launch phase key portal names of use to the entire community will be registered and used for communication and outreach; and
(3) A launch phase led by protection for and registration by trademark holders and those eligible to hold names on reserved lists.


It is anticipated that the pre-launch portal development program identified in (2) above will involve key participants in the Art Community. The portal development program will allocate domain names based on an open and transparent project selection process. This process is highly economical in terms of social costs and yields substantial external benefits.

The portal development program is an essential part of .ART outreach. It begins before delegation of the TLD. In terms of workload and it mainly affects proposers who themselves are required to demonstrate support for their projects. Support will be required to come from the segment of the community concerned with the respective portion of the name space. Given the high value of the resulting on-line resources for the community and the public interest, and given the economic benefits that can be derived from their operation, the administrative effort is largely justified. To further protect affected parties, all adjudications in name space mandates have a safety-valve clause, allowing for later adjustments based on community input. The principle of the safety-valve is that affected parties can obtain adjustments to a component of a mandate if they propose (and commit to) an improved use of the underlying domain names from a public interest perspective.

The launch programs referred to in (3) above combine the so-called “sunrise” and “landrush” processes simultaneously in one phase. The use of domain applications instead of domain registrations means that the registry accepts multiple applications the same domain name. (By contrast, only a single registration can exist for a given domain.) In this way, contention resolution can take place without time pressure in a transparent, fair and orderly manner.


At the time of ongoing registration the first-come rule will be followed. Registrations will be checked in a post-validation process and subject to an enforcement program based on statistically targeted random investigation and complaint follow-up. This program minimizes both costs to registrants and third parties. In particular, it strongly diminishes the attractiveness of rights violations, abuse or malignant behavior. Having been preceded by a controlled launch phase, the validation and enforcement workload faces no resource bottleneck and thus achieves a high degree of credibility, further dissuading abuse from the start. This mode of operation has a strong positive side effect in the interest of trademark holders.


18.3.3 How will multiple applications for a particular domain name be resolved, for example, by auction or on a first-come⁄first-serve basis?
As described below, during pre-launch and launch phase, the first-come-first-served principle is NOT applied. Adjudication by auction is one of the solutions available to the parties in the context of the contention resolution process. In the phase of ongoing registrations the first-come⁄first-served basis of name allocation will be followed, unless the name is one that is on a reserved list, in which case the allocation rules applicable to that list will be followed.

In phases and areas where the first-come-first-served principle tends to yield perverse results, alternative modes will be used.

(1) In the PAB creation phase community research will identify names to be entered into reserved lists and the rules by which they will be allocated;
(2) In the pre-launch phase key portal names of use to the entire community will be registered and used for communication and outreach; and
A launch phase led by protection for and registration by trademark holders and those eligible to hold names on reserved lists.

It is anticipated that the pre-launch portal development program identified in (2) above will involve builders and users in the Art community. The portal development program will allocate domain names based on an open and transparent project selection process. This process is highly economical in terms of social costs and yields substantial external benefits.

The portal development program is an essential part of .Art outreach. It begins before delegation of the TLD. In terms of workload, it mainly affects proposers who themselves are required to demonstrate support for their projects. Support will be required to come from the segment of the community concerned with the respective portion of the name space. Given the high value of the resulting on-line resources for the community and the public interest, and given the economic benefits that can be derived from their operation, the administrative effort is largely justified. To further protect affected parties, all adjudications in name space mandates have a safety-valve clause, allowing for later adjustments based on community input. The principle of the safety-valve is that affected parties can obtain adjustments to a component of a mandate if they propose (and commit to) an improved use of the underlying domain names from a public interest perspective.

The launch programs referred to in (3) above combine the so-called “sunrise” and “landrush” processes simultaneously in one phase. The use of domain applications instead of domain registrations means that the registry accepts multiple applications the same domain name. (By contrast, only a single registration can exist for a given domain.) In this way, contention resolution can take place without time pressure in a transparent, fair and orderly manner.

At the time of ongoing registration the first-com rule will be followed. Registrations will be checked in a post-validation process and subject to an enforcement program based on statistically targeted random investigation and complaint follow-up. This program minimizes both costs to registrants and third parties. In particular, it strongly diminishes the attractiveness of rights violations, abuse or malignant behaviour. Having been preceded by a controlled launch phase, the validation and enforcement workload faces no resource bottleneck and thus achieves a high degree of credibility, further dissuading abuse from the start. This mode of operation has a strong positive side effect in the interest of trademark holders.

18.3.4 Explain any cost benefits for registrants you intend to implement (e.g., advantageous pricing, introductory discounts, bulk registration discounts).
The focus of the .ART gTLD is a competitive cost to registrants and stakeholders that takes into account the limited community nature of the gTLD. This takes into account all burdens, including the effort needed to register or the potential alternative cost to obtain a name on the secondary market. The direct per-unit cost is merely a component of the bottom-line cost.

The cost is greatly reduced by avoiding contention between legitimate community-based applicants and speculators. Community-specific promotion code programs will be used from time to time to offer registrations at low cost. This is a way to avoid perverse effects of low prices, such as speculation with ultimately high costs to registrants, large-scale confusion and waste of the name space, or cybersquatting.

The portal development program will have special terms in order ensure that key portions of name space are used in the public interest.

18.3.5 Note that the Registry Agreement requires that registrars be offered the option to obtain initial domain name registrations for periods of one to ten years at the discretion of the registrar, but no greater than ten years. Additionally, the Registry Agreement requires advance written notice of price increases. Do you intend to make contractual commitments to registrants regarding the magnitude of price escalation? If so, please describe your plans.

The .ART TLD will not be based on or otherwise involve contractual clauses regarding price escalation between the .ART Registry and its registrars.

The .ART business plan is designed to avoid any future necessity to increase registry price in real terms. The fundamental principle is prudence: starting from conservative price levels that allow self-sustainability at the registration levels projected and gradually lowering prices as registration volumes increase beyond the minimum necessary for self-sustained operation. This method ensures sufficient financial reserves, favors optimal allocation of domain names, helps prevent misuse and supports an orderly registration process.

gTLD	Full Legal Name	E-mail suffix	Detail
.kyoto	Academic Institution: Kyoto Jyoho Gakuen	kcg.ac.jp	View

Numerous parties have expressed concerns over the introduction of the new gTLD program with the belief that new TLDs could harm consumer welfare due to consumer confusion. Trademark holders have also brought up the issue of new TLDs imposing additional costs due to the necessity of participating in “defensive” registrations.

KCGI believes these concerns will be sufficiently addressed by its full implementation of ICANN’s new Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) and rules for new TLDs. Listed below is each policy that KCGI will implement, followed by a brief description, to minimize social costs:

　1. Trademark Clearinghouse
　2. Sunrise and Trademark Claims Process
　3. Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
　4. Uniform Rapid Suspension URS
　5. Other Rights Protection Mechanisms


1. Trademark Clearinghouse

The trademark clearinghouse is a mandatory RPM that as been developed in order to serve as a central repository for information to facilitate other RPMs such as the Sunrise Period and Trademark Claims process. Though this RPM is still under development, KCGI’s partners, including its back-end registry services provider, Neustar, are actively playing a role on the IAG to ensure that protections afforded by the clearinghouse and associated RPMs are feasible and implementable. Further information regarding the implementation of this mechanism can be found in reference to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms.


2. Sunrise and Trademark Claims Process

The Sunrise Period is a mandatory launch phase that a registry is required to implement for a minimum of 30 days. KCGI’s back-end registry service provider, Neustar, has extensive experience in implementing sunrise registration periods, most recently under the .CO TLD.

The Trademark Claims process is tied into both the Trademark Clearinghouse and the Sunrise Period and is also a mandatory RPM that is intended to provide ʺclear noticeʺ to a potential registrant(s) if he⁄she attempts to secure a domain name that matches a trademark that is registered in the Trademark Clearinghouse. Though only required by ICANN to implement for 60 days during open registrations, KCGI believes that implementing the service over the life of the registry will prove to be an effective tool in reducing the number of bad-faith registrations and other cases of abuse in the “.kyoto” TLD. KCGI’s back-end provider, Neustar became the first TLD with a Trademark Claims service with the launch of the .BIZ TLD in 2001 and KCGI plans to work closely with Neustar to ensure the service is run smoothly.

The sunrise implementation process is described in more detail above, and in response to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms. More information about the implementation of the Trademark Claims process can be found in answer to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms.


3. Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)

The UDRP is an ICANN Consensus Policy instituted by ICANN in 1998. The UDRP provides trademark holders an alternative method to resolve domain name disputes. KCGI will monitor UDPR decisions regarding domains in the “.kyoto” TLD and take the necessary steps to ensure that decisions rendered by ICANN approved service providers, such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), are correctly implemented by its registrars. In the event that the registry is notified by a trademark owner that a registrar failed to implement a decision KCGI will investigate the claim and take action by either notifying the registrar of its obligations or by proactively implementing the decision itself.


4. Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)

During the planning and policy discussion that took place in the past few years regarding the New gTLD Program, trademark owners identified that the UDRP may not be the most cost effective means to protecting trademark owners rights when hundreds of new TLDs are in operation. Furthermore, the majority of UDRP cases were clearly cases of cybersquatting, however, the UDRP did not produce immediate results. The URS is the result of many discussions with rights holders and offers a more cost effective and speedy mechanism for trademark owners to enforce their rights.

The URS requires a greater deal of participation from the registry than the UDRP and KCGI is fully aware of the requirements involved in the URS.

According to the current draft procedures, KCGI will lock the name within 24 hours or receipt of the complaint from the URS provider in order to ensure the name is not transferred or deleted and to restrict all changes to the registration data. The name will continue to resolve as normal at this point.

Once a determination has been made, and the URS provider has received notification of such a decision, KCGI will act accordingly to implement the determination. Therefore, in the event of a decision for the complainant (trademark owner), KCGI will immediately suspend the name in accordance with the policy, currently for the balance of the registration period. Additionally, the name will no longer be allowed to resolve to the original website, thus the registry will change the name servers to redirect to an informational page provided by the URS provider.

Finally, KCGI will take steps to ensure that the WHOIS information appropriately reflects the current status of the domain name. In doing so, KCGI will leave all the original registration data, except for the nameservers, in place, and clearly reflect that the domain name cannot be transferred, deleted, or modified for the remainder of the registration period.

The current draft policy states that there shall be an option for a successful complainant to the extent the registration period for one additional year at commercial rates.

Additional details regarding the implementation of the URS can be found in response to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms


5. Other Rights Protection Mechanisms

KCGI will fully comply with the Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PDDRP) adopted by ICANN as described in the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook and Specification 7 of the Registry Agreement and other rights mechanisms approved and implemented by ICANN.


i. How will multiple applications for a particular domain name be resolved?

Multiple applications for names under the Founders Program will be handled by objectively reviewing the application against the criteria set forth in the RFP. At which time, the Registry shall make a final selection based on how well each applicant fulfilled the evaluation criteria.

KCGI proposes the implementation of an auction mechanism to handle competing applications in both the Sunrise as Landrush periods. The auction method is a fair way to solve the issue of competing applications because it allows the users to suggest the value they get in return for the domain name by bidding. Conversely, a traditional first-come, first-served model does not infer the value the winner gets if awarded the name.

Settling competing applications though an auction mechanism is more desirable than a first-come, first-served method due to a number of other factors; for example, sunrise applicants (trademark holders) should not have to rush to submit an application for a domain name. If an applicant is forced to try to be first in line, the applicant will be more likely to submit a registration request through multiple registrars. This causes a sub-optimal use of energy on behalf of the applicant, and causes unnecessary work on behalf of the registrars and registry. Another important factor in KCGI’s decision to settle competing applications through an auction mechanism is due to the assumption that the highest bidder has more desire for the name, therefore, the winning applicant is likely provide more utility to Internet users.


ii. Explain any cost benefits for registrants you intend to implement.

The registry will allow local governments of protected geographic names (both local and international) the ability to register their names during a period of no less than a year. This will ensure that they have first rights to register their names for a minimal cost from an ICANN accredited registrar rather than have to dabble in the speculative markets.

As stated above, the registry will handle competing applications in the Sunrise and Landrush periods by implementing an auction mechanism. The auction mechanism is a fair way to solve the issue of competing applications. A traditional first-come first served mechanism will create more load for registrars as one prospective registrant may choose to place the same application for a domain name through several registrars. Additional issues with the first-come, first-served model in that there may be disputes of which registrar’s connection hits the registry first for a certain name.

An auction at the early stages of a registry will benefit registrants by allowing them to purchase the domain name for much less that the cost that they would incur in the domain aftermarket. Furthermore, an auction will allow the users to place a unique value on the domain name. It can be assumed that the bidder who places the higher bid places a higher value on the domain name, and therefore will be more likely to develop the domain name to be beneficial for Internet users.


iii. Do you intend to make contractual commitments to registrants regarding the magnitude of price escalation?

As stated in draft Registry Agreement in the New gTLD Applicant guidebook, the “.kyoto” registry will commit to only adjusting prices based on market conditions. The issue of price increases will be adequately reviewed on a biannual basis. KCGI will provide advanced written notice regarding any price adjustments in accordance with the new gTLD Registry Agreement.