Description of TLD Policies

I. GENERAL TLD POLICIES (Required for all TLDs. Note that two special policy areas‑‑policies during the start‑up period and restrictions on who may register within the TLD and for what purpose‑‑are covered in sections II and III below.)

E1. In General.

In General, most of the TLD policies we are proposing are identical to those policies reflected in the following documents: ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement; NSI Registrar License and Agreement; ICANN-NSI Registry Agreement; Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy. Those policies include:

Compliance with ICANN Policies: We will comply, in our operation of the registry, with all Consensus Policies adopted by ICANN. The definition of Consensus Policies and all of the provisions relating to Consensus Policies in the ICANN-NSI Registry Agreement are acceptable to us.

The existing ICANN-accredited registrars of .com, .org and .net TLDs will be granted licenses in this proposed TLD, if they do not decline this opportunity. We will not select other registrars under the current situation. The domain-name holders will deal through registrars.

We are aware of the fact that Eastcom is currently a registrar in .com, .org and .net TLDs. According to the proposal mentioned above, Eastcom will become a registrar also, which is improper when it remains its identity as the Registry of the new TLD. This is also forbidden by ICANN rules. To resolve this problem, Eastcom is considering to set up a new company and transfer the contractual rights and obligations from Eastcom to the would-be company, of course, with prior consents of ICANN and NSI.

Accreditation: Terms and Conditions of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement seem to be acceptable to us.

Domain Name Dispute Resolution: We will follow the procedures devised by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, especially the Mandatory Administrative Proceeding. We also advise optional dispute resolutions, details of which please find in the Intellectual Property Provisions.

We also propose the following policies which are not contained in the above mentioned documents: TLD String, Name Conventions, …Intellectual Property Protection etc.

E2. TLD String.

In this application we—EASTCOM would like to suppose following TLDs:

1) .SHOP or .STORE

2) .NEWS or .INFO

3) .FIRM or .LTD or .INC

4) .GAME

5) .TOUR

All of these are un-restricted domain names.

We accept 1-5 new domain names above which are assigned by ICANN.

E3. Naming conventions.

Registrants will have names registered at the second level as the current gTLDs do.

E4. Registrars.

We only choose those registrars who were accredited by ICANN to be our registrar. There won’t be any restriction on the number of registrars. Domain-name holders may have the choice to deal through registrars or directly with EASTCOM. We think in the new TLD, registrars play almost the same role as they do in TLDs: com, net and org, so does the registry operator.

E5. Intellectual Property Provisions.

EASTCOM will employ the following measures to protect intellectual property:

To discourage registration of domain names that infringe intellectual property rights, in the first three (3) months, any application for registration of domain name is to be supported by the following documents:

1.Business Information including the

1). the full name of the applicant;

2). the applicant’s postal address;

3). the applicant’s email address;

4). the applicant’s voice telephone number;

5). the applicant’s facsimile number, if available;

6). where the applicant is an organization, association or corporation, the name of an authorized person (or office)for administrative or legal contact purposes.

All of the above must be verified by a practicing lawyer, CPA or Bank manager.

2. Other documents reflecting the relationship between the domain name applied and the applicant, such as the certificate of the trademark, etc.

3. Representations and Warranties made by the applicant as to the ownership of Intellectual Property. (Annex E_1)

After the 3 months period, applications for registration of domain name are not required to contain all the three documents. However, the domain name registration agreement shall contain the following representations:

1) a representation that, to the best of the applicant’s knowledge and belief, neither the registration of the domain name nor the manner in which it is to be directly or indirectly used infringes the intellectual property rights of another party, and

2) a representation that the information provided by the domain name applicant is true and accurate.

The domain name registration agreement will also contain a requirement that the domain name applicant provide accurate and reliable contact details consisting of those elements shown above:

Further more, we encourage that the domain name applicant undertake voluntarily a search of potentially conflicting trademarks.

We will considered, with ICANN’s approval, to cancel a domain name registration when a third party serves a notification upon the registrar alleging:

1) that the domain name registration infringes an intellectual property right; and

2) that contact cannot be established with the domain name holder because the contact details are inaccurate and unreliable.

Upon receipt of the notification, the registrar should independently endeavor to contact the domain name holder using the contact details that have been supplied. If the registrar is unable to establish contact within a reasonable period of time, the domain name registration should be automatically cancelled.

Insofar as the “Famous” or “Well-known” trademarks are concerned, although it is widely used in Internet community, it is actually not a uniform concept of law globally accepted. There is not an established treaty definition of what constitutes such a mark. It is the competent authority in the country where the trademark is using that provides protection to that “famous” or “well-known” mark.

It is an obvious fact that a TLD holder is impossible to refer a trademark to the competent authorities of more than 200 countries or territories to determine whether a trademark is famous or not. Another obvious fact is that a TLD holder must provide some kind of protections for the famous marks; otherwise the principle of protecting famous marks will be totally destroyed by Internet.

If the creation of a Famous Marks list by a qualified administrative panel (such as WIPO) becomes reality, we will strongly back this creation and use this list in connection with a voluntary sunrise period (details please find bellow).

Before WIPO can provide a list of Famous Marks, we will employ the two mechanisms devised in the WIPO Final Report:

1) a mechanism for obtaining and enforcing an exclusion of the use of a famous or well-known mark; and

2) an evidentiary device for ensuring that the protection afforded by an exclusion can be extended to misleadingly similar, as well as the same, domain name registrations.

In order to implement the mechanisms for obtaining and enforcing exclusions, EASTCOM request a contractual authority from ICANN for direct enforcement of any exclusion under the mechanism.

To resolve disputes between registrar and any third party over the registration and use of an Internet domain name registered by the registrar, we will employ the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy with minor amendments to reflect the nature of the new TLD concerned. We will also conduct this dispute resolution policy in accordance with the selected administrative-dispute-resolution service provider’s supplemental rules

We will provide pre-screening protection for famous and well-known marks.

To minimize abusive registration in TLD, policy on Dispute Resolution for Abusive Domain Name Registrations (Annex IV of WIPO Final Report) will be introduced to our Policies. According to this policy, the registration of a domain name shall be considered to be abusive when all of the following conditions are met:

1) the domain name is identical or misleadingly similar to a trade or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and

2) the holder of the domain name has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

3) the domain name has been registered and is used in bad faith.

In connection with the abusive registration, disputes between the domain name applicants or the applicant and other third party shall be resolved in accordance with the variations to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. The said Policy will be widely accepted with minor changes.

As an alternative dispute resolution, a dispute will be introduced to a Mediation Panel for mediation, should both party agrees to. The main difference between the Mediation Panel and other panels is the resolution of the dispute by mediation will be more “private” or “informal” than those by other means. The WIPO Final Report shows shat a significant number of disputes never rise to the level of being reported. A large proportion is resolved informally pursuant to a settlement between the parties. Still a large number of cases simply remain unresolved.

As not recommended by WIPO in its Final Report, a submission to mediation, whether optional or mandatory, will not be incorporated in the domain name registration agreement.

The advantage of mediation is that this provides the parties with an alteration to resolve the dispute in a private way and this might is just what the parties wanted.

E6. Dispute Resolution.

We will employ the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy with minor amendments to reflect the nature of the TLDs concerned.

As an alternative dispute resolution, a dispute will be introduced to a Mediation Panel for mediation, should both party agrees to. The Mediation Panel is among the administrative panels appointed by WIPO. The main difference between the Mediation Panel and other panels is the resolution of the dispute by mediation will be more “private” than those by other means. The WIPO Final Report shows shat a significant number of disputes never rise to the level of being reported. A large proportion be resolved informally pursuant to a settlement between the parties. Still a large number of cases simply remain unresolved.

The advantage of mediation is that this provides the parties with an alteration to resolve the dispute in a private way and this might is just what the parties wanted.

E7. Data Privacy, Escrow, and Whois. Describe the proposed policies on data privacy, escrow and Whois service.

We accept the terms in ICANN-NSI agreement for data Privacy, escrow and providing whois service.

E8. Billing and Collection. Describe variations in or additions to the policies for billing and collection.

No others.

E9. Services and Pricing.

Each new or extend registration should be regarded as chargeable services, other relevant services will be free. We suppose US$6.00 for each new or extend registration.

II. REGISTRATION POLICIES DURING THE START‑UP PERIOD (Required for all TLDs)

E11. In this section, you should thoroughly describe all policies (including implementation details) that you propose to follow during the start‑up phase of registrations in the TLD, to the extent they differ from the General TLD Policies covered in items E1‑E9. The following questions highlight some of the areas that should be considered for start‑up policies:

Since when we prepare the system hardware and software we have take the situation that the demand peak occurs at the beginning into consideration, we don’t think it’s necessary to take special measure to deal with the potential rush.

E12. How do you propose to address the potential rush for registration at the initial opening of the TLD? How many requested registrations do you project will be received by the registry operator within the first day, week, month, and quarter? What period do you believe should be considered the TLD's "start‑up period," during which special procedures should apply?

The number of registration will reach about 50,000 300,000 1,100,000 3,000,000 within the first day week month and quarter.

The “start-up” period will last for about half a year.

E13. Do you propose to place limits on the number of registrations per registrant? Per registrar? If so, how will these limits be implemented?

We will limit the applications of each registrar in each new TLD as follows:

First Day: 500 each

First Week: 3500 each

First Month 15000 each

First Quart: no limit

The Start-up Period will last one month.

E14. Will pricing mechanisms be used to dampen a rush for registration at the initial opening of the TLD? If so, please describe these mechanisms in detail.

No such pricing mechanisms will be used.

E15. Will you offer any "sunrise period" in which certain potential registrants are offered the opportunity to register before registration is open to the general public? If so, to whom will this opportunity be offered (those with famous marks, registered trademarks, second‑level domains in other TLDs, pre‑registrations of some sort, etc.)? How will you implement this?

No such “sunrise period”

III. REGISTRATION RESTRICTIONS (Required for restricted TLDs only)

E16. As noted in the New TLD Application Process Overview, a restricted TLD is one with enforced restrictions on (1) who may apply for a registration within the domain, (2) what uses may be made of those registrations, or (3) both. In this section, please describe in detail the restrictions you propose to apply to the TLD. Your description should should define the criteria to be employed, the manner in which you propose they be enforced, and the consequences of violation of the restrictions. Examples of matters that should be addressed are:

E17. Describe in detail the criteria for registration in the TLD. Provide a full explanation of the reasoning behind the specific policies chosen.

E18. Describe the application process for potential registrants in the TLD.

E19. Describe the enforcement procedures and mechanisms for ensuring registrants meet the registration requirements.

E20. Describe any appeal process from denial of registration.

E21. Describe any procedure that permits third parties to seek cancellation of a TLD registration for failure to comply with restrictions.

IV. CONTEXT OF THE TLD WITHIN THE DNS (Required for all TLDs)

People can easily distinguish the different categories of web-site through various domain names. This can easily help the terminal customers of internet get the services they urgently want.

“.shop” or “.store” will serve for the shopkeepers, supermarkets and multiple shops. The objective markets are those who intend to release information and provide relevant services or products directly to the customers and clients.

“.news” or “.info” serve for the newspapers, broadcasts, TV and many traditional mess mediums, announcers of new mess mediums like network. The objective markets are those who intend to release information and provide informational services directly to the customers and clients.

“.firm” serve for the enterprise organizations (jointly by over two people, but not necessarily have legal qualification), firms and factories. The objective markets are those who intend to release information and provide relevant services directly to the customers and clients through internet. It will attract much more non-corporate firms(not “corporations” strictly) to register if using the domain name like “.FIRM”. It will also be a bridge between the customers and businessmen through internet. The former registrants who using the long domain names will be willing to apply for a shorter one as it can be easily visited by more customers.

And “.ltd” or “.inc” will give people more selections when they want to establish a business plant and the characteristic of it

“.game” means entertainment, including sports, game, etc..

“.tour” means travel and sight-seeing, climbing, etc..

It will attract much more mess mediums who already registered or will register if using the domain name like “.shop”,“.NEWS”,etc . It will also be a bridge between the customers and businessmen through internet. The former registrants who using the long domain names will be willing to apply for a shorter one as it can be easily visited by more customers.

With the introduction of TLD, the internet customers have more choices when using DNS. It will help the customers save a lot of time when search for the effective information. “ in time and be effective” will attract more customers.

The introduction of TLD will no doubt to arise the drastic competition with the former server like NSI, more customers will be willing to choose “.news” or other newTLD. Maybe many customers will still maintain the primary domain names, indubitably the short domain names will be much more better.

above mentioned names are lacking of visualizability and they are not easily remembered by the internet customers.

It will attract much more businessmen who already registered or will register if using the domain name like “.SHOP”. It will also be a bridge between the customers and businessmen through internet. The former registrants who using the long domain names will be willing to apply for a shorter one so that can be easily visited by more customers.

The introduction of TLD will no doubt to arise the drastic competition with the former server like NSI, more customers will be willing to choose “.SHOP”. Maybe many customers will still maintain the primary domain names, indubitably the short domain names will be much more better.

V. VALUE OF PROPOSAL AS A PROOF OF CONCEPT (Required for all TLDs)

E28. Recent experience in the introduction of new TLDs is limited in some respects. The current program of establishing new TLDs is intended to allow evaluation of possible additions and enhancements to the DNS and possible methods of implementing them. Stated differently, the current program is intended to serve as a "proof of concept" for ways in which the DNS might evolve in the longer term. This section of the application is designed to gather information regarding what specific concept(s) could be evaluated if the proposed TLD is introduced, how you propose the evaluation should be done, and what information would be learned that might be instructive in the long‑term management of the DNS. Well‑considered and articulated responses to this section will be positively viewed in the selection process. Matters you should discuss in this section include:

E29. What concepts are likely to be proved/disproved by evaluation of the introduction of this TLD in the manner you propose?

One concept that all the members of internet community has the equal right and chance in the internet affairs, and we’re sure it will be fully proved in the evaluation of this application.

E30. How do you propose that the results of the introduction should be evaluated? By what criteria should the success or lack of success of the TLD be evaluated?

As concluded by ICANN, “Deployment of new gTLDs with an initial rollout of six to ten new gTLDs, followed by an evaluation period” is the basis of the current program. We are of the view that the following concepts shall be evaluated.

Network Experiences:

Network experiences is an essential element in evaluation. He who proposes a new gTLD shall be familiar with the most recent developments in network and Internet.

Representative:

Since the Internet resource is a resource owned by the whole human beings, and the Internet community is a community composed with all people and entities world wide, it is necessary to take into account the representative of the operators. Thus, race, population, location (in different continents) and languages shall be the elements of determining representative.

Size of Market:

From commercial point of view, Market is a vital element of evaluation. Only those proposed TLDs with large potential markets should pass the evaluation.

Disputes Resolution Methods:

An unfair or improper resolution of dispute will discourage the good faith Internet users and encourage the bad players. It will also destroy the orders the administrator and the whole Internet community have endeavored to establish for many years.

E31. In what way would the results of the evaluation assist in the long‑range management of the DNS?

Should select large, steadily growing company to manage newTLDs.

E32. Are there any reasons other than evaluation of the introduction process that this particular TLD should be included in the initial introduction?

None.

By signing this application through its representative, the Applicant attests that the information contained in this Description of TLD Policies, and all referenced supporting documents, are true and accurate to the best of Applicant's knowledge.

_______________________________

Signature

Yu Xudong__ _____

Name (please print)

Vice President __

Title

_Eastern Communications Company Limited

Name of Applicant Entity

_Sep 27,2000________________________

Date

Updated August 15, 2000