Description of TLD Policies

 

 

I   General TLD Policies

E1.Please provide a full and detailed description of all the policies to be followed in the TLD (other than those covered in response to items E11-E21). If the TLD’s policy on a particular topic is proposed to be identical to that reflected by a particular version of any of the following documents, it is sufficient for your response to identify the topic, to give a brief summary of the policy, and for the details to reference the document and section:

 

·        ICANN-NSI Registry Agreement;

·        NSI Registrar License and Agreement;

·        ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement; and

·        Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy.

General

Telnic will at all times use its reasonable endeavors to implement and adhere to any and all consensus policies introduced by ICANN, so as to further the development and stability of the Internet and the global Internet community.  

 

Telnic intends to create a Policy Advisory Board (the “PAB”), which will consist of legal, technical, commercial, business and/or other advisors, to review and propose policy and advise Telnic’s management and, if appropriate, to also advise Telnic’s registrars on matters directly relating to the performance, functionality, management and delegated policy of the .TEL domain name.  The PAB’s functions will include reviewing and making decisions on the following policies:

 

·        the distribution of SLDs and ccSLDs (and sub-levels) and their restricted and/or unrestricted status;

·        ICANN issues and policies;

·        the issues and policies of other recognized authorities, such as WIPO; and

·        any charitable work undertaken by Telnic through its Foundation.

 

It is envisaged that the PAB’s policies will (as appropriate) encompass the policies and current thinking of the Internet’s recognised authorities together with the policies developed in-house by the PAB with input from ICANN.  Telnic will adopt a number of policies including, but without limitation, policies relating to data protection, privacy, equal employment opportunities, and the transfer of domain names between registrants and/or registrars.

 

Should Telnic, however, have a requirement to modify any existing ICANN policies, Telnic intends to consult with ICANN and any other authorities of competent jurisdiction, with respect to such changes to ensure that the Internet community is not adversely affected by their implementation.

 

In addition to adhering to ICANN’s current policies, where appropriate, Telnic realises that there is likely to be a need to develop, create and introduce new policies regarding the .TEL domain name.  This will be particularly relevant as and when technologies with respect to the Internet and Voice-over-Internet Protocols converge. Telnic will also consult and involve ICANN in the decision making process regarding these new policies. 

 

Regarding the ICANN/NSI agreements and/or the policy referred to in question E1 (as set out above), Telnic intends to implement agreements and policies which will mirror those listed to a large extent. Telnic sets out its comments in respect of each agreement and the policy in turn below. 

 

ICANN-NSI [Telnic] Registry Agreement (the “Registry Agreement”)

In respect of the Registry Agreement, Telnic agrees in principle to its terms and conditions. However, this Registry Agreement contains a number of terms specific to the ICANN/NSI relationship. Telnic would be grateful for clarification to the extent, if any, such terms would be applicable to Telnic.

 

Telnic would like clarification in discussions from ICANN in respect of the following sections:

 

·        Section 6: NSI Registry-Level Financial Support of ICANN

The extent to which, if any, pre-payments will be required to be paid by Telnic to ICANN.

 

·        Section 16: Relationship to Cooperative Agreement between NSI and US Government

The applicability of this section in respect of ICANN/Telnic is sought.

 

·        Section 20: Price for Registry Services

Telnic would like to discuss with ICANN the pricing policy for registrars.

 

·        Section 22: Designation of Successor Registry

Telnic would like clarification in discussions from ICANN with respect to the applicability of this section.

 

·        Section 23: Expiration of this Agreement

Telnic would like clarification from ICANN as to the intended duration of the Registry Agreement.


Telnic Registrar License and Agreement

Telnic intends to build a worldwide network of Registrars based on the existing ICANN Accredited Registrars model, who will support the .TEL domain name. This will be via the registry website at www.telnic.org. Telnic further intends to adopt the principles of the NSI Registrar License and Agreement (the “NRLA”) including the Registrar’s Dispute Policy, the Policy on Transfer of Sponsorship of Registrations Between Registrars and the Confidentiality Agreement.  However, Telnic recognizes that certain terms and conditions of the NRLA may not be directly relevant to the Telnic approach and also that the NRLA does not necessarily reflect Telnic’s use of the DNS, which will be designed to meet a diversity of community needs.  Whilst the precise issues have not yet been recognised in their entirety, the following is a list of the terms and conditions of the NRLA which may not be relevant to Telnic’s relationship with its registrars:

 

·        Section 2.3: New Architectural Features

Whilst this section is specific to NSI, Telnic will endeavor to provide its registrars with all software that will enable the secure and stable access to the system for the registration of second-level domains in the .TEL TLD.  All upgrades of such software will be provided to all registrars following successful testing and evaluation.

 

·        Section 2.5: Data Submission Requirements

In addition to the requirements as listed under this clause, Telnic will ensure that the registrars obtain the consents of their customers to place their personal data on the Whois Service and in Escrow, in accordance with relevant data privacy legislation. 

 

·        Section 2.7: Registrar’s Registration Agreement and Domain Name Dispute

Telnic intends to adopt the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy and expects its registrars to adopt the same ICANN accredited policy.

 

·        Section 2.9: Domain Name Lookup Capability

As with the Data Submission Requirements, Telnic will ensure that it is not liable for misuse of an individual’s personal data and will insist that its registrars must obtain the prior consent of all customers in order to place such information on the Whois Service.

 

·        Section 2.15: Prohibited Domain Name Registrations

Unregisterable domain names will be shown as “unavailable” on Telnic’s Whois Service.  The unregisterability of a domain name will be determined solely and exclusively by Telnic.

 

·        Section 3.2(iii): Limitations of Use

Telnic will allow its registrars to reverse engineer any of the software provided by Telnic from time to time for the purpose of enabling the registrar to develop compatible and/or interoperable software products.

 

·        Section 5.1: License Fee

Telnic would like to discuss with ICANN the license fee structure.

 

·        Section 5.2: Registration Fees

Telnic would also like to discuss with ICANN the registration fee structure. 

 

·        Other

As mentioned above, all references to the US Department of Commerce and NSI’s Cooperative Agreement with the US Government are unlikely to be applicable.

 

ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement

With respect to the ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement, Telnic agrees in principle to its terms and conditions, in particular, with respect to the data protection and privacy policies dealt with in sections E, F and G of the agreement. 

 

Telnic would like clarification in discussions from ICANN in respect of the following sections:

 

·        Section 6b: Public Access to Data

Telnic would like to discuss with ICANN the annual fee structure.

 

·        Section 6f: Public Access to Data

Telnic will not allow individuals the opportunity to elect not to have their “personal data” disclosed.

 

·        Section O Term of Agreement

Telnic would like clarification in discussions from ICANN as to the intended duration of this agreement and its possible renewal.

 

·        Other

All references to the US Department of Commerce are unlikely to be relevant.

 

Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy

Telnic’s dispute resolution policies in respect of the .TEL SLD and other disputes will be governed by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy (the “Policy”) as adopted by ICANN on 24 October 1999.  The Policy will be incorporated by reference into all Registration Agreements.  It is also intended that the Telnic.org website (Telnic’s Registry website) will set out a procedure to explain to registrants in a user-friendly manner how they can initiate proceedings under the Policy.

 

Telnic does not intend to participate in any dispute between a registrant and a third party, all proceedings will be administered by an approved ICANN dispute resolution provider (the “Provider”).   A list of the approved ICANN Providers will be made available to registrants by way of a hyperlink from the Telnic.org website to the list maintained by ICANN.

 

In order to facilitate the dispute resolution process, Telnic will work with the Provider by developing an administration process to help ensure the smooth operation of the dispute resolution process.   As an example, Telnic will also allocate each complaint with a number upon receipt, and record the date and time of such receipt.  To assist the Provider, Telnic will confirm that the complainant is the registered domain name holder and that the complainant’s details are correct.  Telnic will also track the status of domain names which are the subject of a dispute and will block any attempt to transfer a domain name which is the subject of a dispute with a third party.

 

Telnic is not proposing to adopt any additional, alternative or supplemental dispute resolution procedures.

 

E2. TLD String Proposal

 

            Telnic is proposing the TLD string of “tel”.      

 

E3. Naming Conventions

 

Telnic intends to rollout the .TEL TLD domain name registration program in two phases. During the first phase Telnic will only issue domain name registrations comprising of second level domain names, thereby excluding ccSLDs. Country code second level domain names will only be issued during the second phase of the rollout.

 

Prior to issuing “.TEL” domain names, Telnic intends to “quarantine” (please refer to section E10 below) a number of generic words, phrases, characters and/or digits to its master “.TEL” domain name database as second level .TEL domain names and third level (below country code SLDs). With the few exceptions set out later, these will, however, be issued by Telnic as domain names at a later date. The purpose for withholding such second level and third level domain names is to prevent potential registrants from registering domain names such as “edu.tel”, thereby preventing other prospective registrants from entering that domain name space.

 

In addition, Telnic will also include in its master “.TEL” database words and phrases which it, in its sole and exclusive discretion, considers to be “abusive, obscene and/or offensive”, thereby preventing prospective registrants from registering domain name which comprise of such abusive, obscene and/or offensive words and/or phrases as these will come up in the database as being “unavailable”.

 

Similarly, Telnic intends to reserve strings of four or less characters to protect future SLD or ccSLD paths and to ensure that proper consultation with ICANN can take place prior to Telnic’s issuance of such new domain names.

 

Finally, it is anticipated that long-form country names and certain geographic names, including names of cities will be reserved, as this will create future growth paths for country sub-level domain names. However, the reservation of such country, city and geographic names will be subject to ICANN’s approval.

 

E4.            Registrars

 

Telnic is committed to the creation of a balanced, robust, international and equitable administration of the .TEL namespace (which will be dedicated to voice-video-data) within the Internet DNS.  An ICANN accredited Registrars’ system will be essential to providing a stable and robust .TEL domain name registration system.

 

Within the phased rollout Telnic will seek to put in place a network of registrars, which will include a “lead registrar” for each ccSLD, around the world. Each chosen lead registrar will be responsible for ensuring the implementation of the new .TEL TLD policies in its particular territory. In addition, Telnic will implement contractual provisions which will govern its relationship with the various registrars to ensure conformity amongst all registrars in respect of the issuance of .TEL domain names around the world.

 

Whilst Telnic is the Sponsoring Organization for the determination and implementation of the .TEL TLD policy, only one registrar will oversee the resolution of competing applications made during the pre-registration (please refer to section E5 below.) for SLDs in its territory.

 

Telnic proposes that it creates its own separate registrar entity (Telnic.com) which will be an ICANN accredited registrar for the new .TEL TLD.  Telnic.com will operate its .TEL domain name registration services from its www.telnic.com website.

 

Telnic envisages that its registrars for the new .TEL TLD will also play a key role in promoting, subject to ICANN’s agreement, Telnic’s concept of creating .TEL domain names which will be restricted for the use of private individuals only (e.g. such as “.pp.tel”(“pp” stands for private person)). Telnic’s aim is to keep the cost of registering such domain names to a minimum to give individuals the opportunity to own their individual .TEL domain name in this new namespace. Telnic will allow registrars to choose whether or not they wish to get involved in issuing these specific domain names, as some registrars may not consider this proposal commercially viable.

 

ICANN’s accreditation system of suitable registrars will clearly be Telnic’s starting point for selecting suitable registrars for its .TEL domain name registration system.  However, Telnic envisages that other criteria may need to be considered and these will be tabled with ICANN before finalizing the selection process for its registrars. It is anticipated that the final model adopted by Telnic will be one which will further competition amongst the Internet community.

 

As part of Telnic’s strategy to implement .TEL as a tiered namespace, Telnic has to adopt an approach which will necessarily be responsive to the needs of the Internet community, the public, and certain vested-interest groups.

 

In pursuit of these aims, and considering that .TEL has special demands, a series of very narrow guidelines and policies will need to be formulated, and these codes will encompass and include principles relating to .TEL registrars.

 

New specific .TEL policies will be developed in as short a time as possible. Telnic’s new .TEL policies will be consensus-based and will enshrine ICANN’s key policies (as stated in “E1” above). As part of its guidelines, Telnic will address various issues relating to:

 


1.Country Codes

Telnic will consider any and all issues relating to the restriction of .TEL SLDs, such as “edu.tel” and will accordingly create rules and guidelines around such restrictions.  Certain portability issues regarding country codes might arise and therefore Telnic will consider including such issues in its country code guidelines.


2.Stability and Robustness

Telnic will implement guidelines and policies which will engender a stable Internet environment for the .TEL namespace. Telnic also intends to encourage innovative ways of using the Internet  and .TEL.


3.Consistency

Telnic will promote consistency amongst its registrars by encouraging all to apply similar if not identical guidelines and policies, based on ICANN’s key Internet policies and standards, in their running of the .TEL domain name registration services.  The key  .TEL TLD policies and guidelines will be formulated by Telnic in conjunction with ICANN and other relevant Internet organizations.


4.Namespace Focal Point

The Telnic website is envisaged as being a contact point and conduit between Telnic, ICANN and other Internet bodies which will allow for discussions to take place in relation to all matters relating to the .TEL namespace. Telnic anticipates that such a venue will encourage parties to reach agreement with respect to important .TEL TLD policies which are likely to mirror established governing Internet policies and practices.


5.Transparency and Equitability

Telnic intends to promote an equitable and transparent .TEL domain name service by providing the prospective registrants with as much information about Telnic and its views in respect of promoting the use of the new .TEL TLD amongst the Internet community. Telnic will provide this type of information on its www.telnic.org website. 

 

For the above reasons, and the need to develop and implement guidelines in a thorough and open manner Telnic intends to implement a phased rollout of the Registry. This will involve the prioritized development and implementation of a fair, equitable and competitive Registrar system.

 

E5            Intellectual Property

 

E5.1     What measures will be taken to discourage registration of domain names that infringe intellectual property rights?

 

Proposal

1.         Telnic is considering the provision of an information service to prospective registrants on its www.telnic.org website which will set out ways in which registrants can avoid infringing intellectual property rights belonging to another when registering and using a .TEL domain name. The information to be provided by Telnic will briefly describe trademarks, passing off and cybersquatting and the remedies which may be sought by the third party in each case. 

 

Telnic is also considering providing the registrants with directional guidance to check whether the proposed domain name, which they wish to register, might infringe someone else’s intellectual property rights before the registrant applies for the registration of the domain name. As a part of this pro-active policy, Telnic is likely to provide:

 

a)         on its www.telnic.org website one or more hyperlinks to sites which will allow the registrant to carry out some initial trademark searches (for example, hyperlinks to the UK Patent and Trade Mark Office, the US Patent and Trademark Office, the OHIM (organization in charge of registering Community Trade Marks) and the Japanese Trade Mark Office). In addition it is likely that Telnic will also provide hyperlinks to websites which will allow the registrant to carry out additional checks of registered domain names and company names in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Access to websites which will provide the registrant with valuable information relating to the protection of intellectual property rights on the Internet (for example, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (“WIPO”) websites) will also be provided; or

b)         alternatively, Telnic may let the registrant know on its website which organizations and/or website addresses the registrant could access to either carry out the trademark searches or inform the registrant on how the registrant should proceed in order to ensure that the domain name that the registrant wishes to register does not infringe third party intellectual property rights.

 

Furthermore, Telnic will always advise registrants not to register a domain name if the registrant becomes aware that a registered trademark is either identical and/or confusingly similar to the proposed domain name. In addition, Telnic will advise registrants to seek professional advice and assistance before registering their domain name.

 

In respect of the above, Telnic is aware that it will not be able to provide the registrant with an exhaustive list of the relevant organisations and/or websites and that it cannot compel the registrant to carry out such checks. Nevertheless, Telnic believes that by providing links and/or information in respect of say, the four main trademark registries around the world (as listed above) together with WIPO, the registrant should be better informed to determine whether or not his/her domain name is protected by third party trademark rights.

 

2.         Telnic envisages that its standard Registration Agreement (an example of which can be seen on the www.telnic.com website) will include the following provision:

 

“In making an application, the registrant represents and warrants to Telnic that the registrant has the right to use that part of the domain name to which the application relates and that if the registrant is to use such domain name such use will not infringe the rights of any third party, wheresoever situated.  Acceptance of a domain name by Telnic shall not be construed as Telnic approving or agreeing that the registrant has any right to register and/or use that name.”

 

3.         Telnic will also adopt by way of reference in its Registration Agreements, the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy (the “Policy”) as adopted by ICANN on 24 October 1999. The Policy sets out the process to manage disputes between domain name holders and trademark owners. Under the Policy, Telnic will have the right to cancel, assign and/or otherwise transfer domain names if the ICANN dispute resolution provider (Please refer to section E6.1 below.) finds that the domain name infringes a third party’s trademark.

 

Technical Solution

The way in which Telnic envisages delivering part one of the proposal above is by way of technical solutions.  Telnic will design and/or develop its website in such a way whereby the registrant is provided with information and/or links to carry out pre-registration checks if the registrant wishes to do so.

 

This will be achieved by incorporating into Telnic’s website a way that the registrant will be able to access a website which contains the following information:

 

1.         a brief explanation of trademarks, passing off and cybersquatting and the consequences that may arise if a person should be found to have done one of these acts;

2.         either hyperlinks (as mentioned above) to or contact details of the organizations which would be able to assist the registrant in ensuring that the proposed domain name does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights; and

3.         a statement advising the registrant to seek independent professional assistance.

 

By using the Telnic’s website in this way, Telnic places the onus on the registrant to take the necessary measures to ensure that the proposed domain name will not infringe any third party intellectual property rights. This technical solution falls in line with the accepted policy that the Registry will not be responsible for policing trademark violations when registering domain names for registrants. 

 

Conclusion

Telnic has considered whether the technical solution will be practicable and effective if launched by Telnic. Although, the above-mentioned solution goes some way in trying to minimise infringements of third party intellectual property rights, Telnic is conscious of its potential “downsides” and these are briefly summarized below as follows:

 

1.         even if Telnic provides the registrants with information relating to trademarks, passing off and cybersquatting and gives registrants a chance to establish whether or not their proposed domain name will infringe third party intellectual property rights, Telnic cannot guarantee that the registrant will actually read and/or understand the information provided by Telnic and/or  carry out the necessary searches; and

 

2.         with respect to providing the registrant with either hyperlinks and/or information relating to informative sites, Telnic is unlikely to be in a position where it can say that the registrant has access to all the relevant sites and/or is provided with the information relating to all necessary and useful websites, for the following reasons:

 

a) many of the Trade Mark Registries around the world will not allow or facilitate the carrying out of on-line trademark searches; and

b) if an exhaustive list of hyperlinks and information were to be provided in their entirety, then the registrant would be overwhelmed by the links and information provided.

 

Nevertheless, Telnic believes that the proposal and the technical solution suggested above will go a fair way towards discouraging registrants from registering domain names which are likely to infringe third party intellectual property rights. Telnic also believes that the proposal and/or solution is equitable in that it provides the registrant with suggestions on how the registrant can ensure that the domain name which the registrant applies for does not infringe any third party intellectual property right(s) but at the same time preserves Telnic’s position in that Telnic will not take any responsibility for policing trade mark violations.

 

E5.2     If you are proposing pre-screening for potentially infringing registrations, how will the pre-screening be performed?

 

Pre-launch Period

Background

 

When ICANN announced that it was considering introducing new TLDs, trademark owners expressed their concern that the issuance of new TLDs will increase the amount of potential trademark infringement, passing off and cybersquatting cases to such an extent that it would be virtually impossible for trademark owners to police the Internet effectively for trademark violations.

 

Consequently, ICANN created a “Working Group B” in July 1999 whose responsibility was to discuss and consider ways in which this problem could be dealt with. It was suggested by a number of corporations that a “Famous Trade-Marks List” be created and that any domain name application comprising in part or in whole of any trademark on that list, would be refused registration.

 

After long discussions, it was agreed that a Famous Trade-Marks List was not the most effective solution, for the following reasons:

 

1.         it would expand the existing rights of famous trademark holders;

2.         it would block others from using domain names comprising of famous trademarks in non-commercial and generic ways;

3.         the number of so-called famous trademarks could potentially grow into millions;

4.         it would be extremely difficult to decide the criteria that should be considered to decide whether a trademark should be added to the Famous Trade-Marks List; and

5.         who would be responsible for creating the Famous Trade-Marks List.

 

Therefore, in lieu of creating a Famous Trade-Marks List, the “Sunrise Proposal plus Twenty” was tabled. Under this proposal, it was suggested that famous trademark owners should get a chance to pre-register domain names comprising of their trademarks (plus twenty variations thereof) before the new TLD is opened to the general public.

 

Telnic’s solution

Telnic will put forward for debate an approach whereby it will allow registered trademark or service mark owners (of either famous or non-famous marks) to pre-register their second level .TEL domain names during a “Pre-Launch Period”.  The Pre-Launch Period is currently scheduled to last for 2 months. The registration of .TEL domain name during the Pre-Launch Period will be undertaken by Telnic.com (i.e. which Telnic envisages as to be an ICANN accredited registrar) which is a distinctly separate entity to Telnic.org (i.e. the .TEL sponsoring organization domain name registry).

 

Notification

 

Prior to the Pre-Launch Period, Telnic will use its reasonable endeavors to inform as many Trade Marks Registries and Trade Mark Agents around the world that the pre-registration period will begin on, say, 1 January 2000 for a period of 2 months, during which time all registered trademark and service mark owners will have a right to pre-register their second level .TEL domain names.

 

In addition, Telnic will post a notice on its www.telnic.org and www.telnic.com websites informing such trademark and service mark owners when the Pre-Launch Period will begin. This way, Telnic hopes to ensure that a large number of registered trademark and service mark owners will have sufficient notice to allow them to apply for their new domain names as soon as the Pre-Launch Period starts.

 

Search

 

A registrant will be able to carry out initial on-line searches to verify whether or not a his proposed domain name has already been applied for during the pre-registration stage.  If any prior registrants have filed an application with Telnic for the same domain name, Telnic’s search results will inform the registrant where in the queue the registrant is. Therefore, if the registrant is the third person to file an application for a specific domain name then the registrant will be informed of this, so that the registrant can decide whether to go ahead with the domain name application.

 

Naturally, as part of this search sequence the registrant will be able to refer to Telnic’s appropriate Registration Agreement.

 

Application

 

During the Pre-Launch Period, trademark and service mark owners will have the right to apply for domain names using an on-line “application template”. The trademark or service mark owner will need to provide Telnic with the following information when completing the application template:

 

            a)            the full name of the domain name pre-registration registrant;

            b)            the corresponding domain name (subject to normal conventions);

            c)            the trademark or service mark (word mark only);

            d)            the country of registration of the trademark or service mark;

            e)            the registration number of the trademark or service mark;

f)            the name of the legal owner of the registered mark;

g)         confirms the registrant in (a) acts with the full authority of the entity referred to in (f) (if these are not the same); and

h)            pre-registration payment provision.

 

Submission

 

Once the registrant has completed the application template it will be submitted on-line by the registrant to Telnic. Shortly thereafter the registrant will receive an e-mail from Telnic confirming the appropriate registrant’s record details.

 

Verification

 

Option: Proposal 1

 

Telnic will then verify, through its Trade Mark Agents worldwide, the details provided by the registrant in respect of each domain name application, which if verified successfully will proceed to registration. Whether or not an application will go through to registration will depend on the “first-come-first-served” principle. This means therefore, that if, say, ten individuals apply for the “mycompany.tel” domain name, only the first application that was received by Telnic for that domain name will be verified.  If Telnic, when verifying the details, finds that the registrant’s details do not match the details held at the various Trade Mark Registries around the world, Telnic will reject that application and will begin the verification process in respect of the second application filed for the “mycompany.tel” name. This procedure will continue until Telnic is able to verify the details of an application successfully.  Telnic believes that in most cases it will only need to verify one or two applications (at the most) before it is able to successfully register a domain name. 

 

Option: Proposal 2

 

In the alternative, Telnic will require the registrant of each new proposed .TEL domain name to provide Telnic with a certified copy of their trademark or service mark registration certificate.

 

In this case, the verification process will require Telnic to review all the trademark and/or service mark registration certificates received from the registrants and to compare these against the details provided by the registrant on the application template. If the details on the certified trademark and/or service mark registration certificate correlate with the details provided by the registrant, Telnic will register the proposed domain name.

 

Once again, Telnic will apply the “first-come-first-served” principle in deciding which domain name will be accepted for registration (provided that the verification is successful).  

 

Post-Launch Period

 

Telnic does not propose to carry out any pre-screening for potentially infringing registrations during the Post-Launch Period for the following reasons:

 

1.         domain name registries cannot reasonably be expected to be responsible for policing trademark violations on behalf of trademark owners and English and American courts have adopted this position in the past for the following reasons:

 

a)         the Trade Mark Acts place the burden of policing trademark violations onto the trademark owners themselves; and

b)         the registries do not have the time, knowledge and capacity to check each domain name they register to determine whether the registration may or may not infringe third party intellectual property rights.

 

2.         If Telnic were to adopt a policy whereby it took it upon itself to police trademark violations when registering domain names, it would potentially set a precedent, which could require all future domain name registries to police trademark violations.

 

This would be an unacceptable position for domain name registries because they would be unlikely to have the resources required for such a task.  In addition, the adoption of policing trade mark violations would be likely to have adverse affects for the Internet community, as the domain name registries:

 

a)         would need to increase the registration fees to ensure that they have the financial resources to carry out the necessary trademark searches;

b)         the time in which a domain name will be registered may extend to weeks and/or months; and

c)         the registries would be extremely cautious of registering any domain names. 

 

E5.3     What Registration practices will be employed to minimise abusive registrations?

 

Telnic has interpreted this question as asking:

 

1.         What registration procedures will be put in place by Telnic to minimise the number of domain name applications which comprise in part or in whole of abusive, offensive and/or obscene words; and

2.         What registration procedures will be in put in place to minimise the number of domain name applications that are filed in “bad faith”?


Telnic answers these questions in turn below.

 

1.            Abusive, offensive and obscene domain name applications

 

In order to deal with potentially, abusive, offensive and obscene domain name applications Telnic will incorporate in its Registration Agreements a provision which provides that:

 

“Telnic shall have a right to reject, cancel or invalidate any domain name application and/or registration which, it in its sole discretion, reasonably believes to be abusive, offence and/or obscene. Telnic’s decision in this regard shall be final and binding.”

 

“Abusive, offensive and obscene” will be defined as meaning what is generally accepted by the public as being abusive, offensive and/or obscene at any given time, as determined solely and exclusively by Telnic.


In addition, Telnic has also considered whether to develop and/or create software which would be able to detect and block domain name applications for domain names which in whole or in part comprise an abusive, offensive or obscene word(s). Telnic can envisage that it may develop this type of software in the future, should it become the registry for the new .TEL TLD. Telnic will, however, look to amalgamate appropriate databases of abusive, offensive or obscene words prior to going live with the .TEL domain name registration service. 


2.            Domain name applications filed in “bad faith”


With the evolution of the Internet various individuals and organisations have been and still are involved in the practice of stockpiling Internet domain names comprising of trademarks and/or brands (usually famous) purely for the purpose of selling them on for a profit (i.e. cybersquatting).

 

In order to overcome this problem, Telnic proposes to:

 

a.            introduce a Pre-Launch Period of two months during which time trademark and service mark owners will be allowed to register domain names with the new .TEL TLD, before the new domain is opened up to the general public; and

b.         adopt a dispute resolution, which will mirror ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution and which will be used to resolve disputes between domain name holders and trademark owners. When the domain name holder applies for the domain name the registrant will be required (as part of the terms and conditions of Telnic’s Registration Agreement) to agree to this Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution process.

 

a.         Pre-Launch Period

 

Please refer to Telnic’s answer at E5.2 above.

b.            Implementing the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution


The dispute resolution policies in respect of the .TEL TLD and other disputes will be governed by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy (the “Policy”) as adopted by ICANN on 24 October 1999.  The Policy will be incorporated by reference into all Registration Agreements. 

 

For further information on Telnic’s dispute resolution policy, please refer to section E6 below.


E5.4     What measures do you propose to comply with applicable trademark and anti-cybersquatting legislation?

 

Telnic shall ensure that all of its policies and terms and conditions, relating to the registration of a .TEL domain name, will allow Telnic to take all necessary steps to ensure that it can comply with any and all orders and/or judgements granted by an authority of competent jurisdiction in respect of a dispute between a domain name holder and trademark owner.

 

Telnic’s Registration Agreement shall include a provision, whereby Telnic reserves the right to cancel, assign and/or otherwise transfer the right in a domain name to another, if so required either under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution or in order to comply with any order and/or judgement passed by an authority of competent jurisdiction.


E5.5     Are you proposing any special protection (other than during the start-up period) for famous trademarks?

 

Telnic does not intend to provide special protection for famous trademarks either during the Pre-Launch Period or during the Post-Launch Period, because such special protection could be discriminatory against trademark owners who do not own “famous” trademarks.

 

Background

 

With the announcement by ICANN that it is considering issuing new gTLDs, the trademark community became very concerned that cases of trademark infringement, passing off and cybersquatting would increase as soon as the new gTLDs are issued. In view of their concern ICANN set up a Working Group B which would address these issues. 

 

The main proposal considered and discussed by the working group was the issuance of a “Famous Trade-Marks List” (“List”) which would be created by the main corporations worldwide. The idea was that any trademark that is listed on the List would be prevented from being registered as a domain name, thereby preventing trademark infringement and confusion.

 

This proposal was, however, rejected by the working group in so far as they felt that:

 

1.         it would expand the existing rights of famous trademark holders;

2.         it would block others from using domain names comprising of a famous trademark in non-commercial and generic ways;

3.         the number of so-called famous trademarks could potentially grow into the millions;

4.         it would be extremely difficult to establish an exhaustive list of criteria that would need to be satisfied for a trademark to be considered famous; and

5.         who would be responsible for deciding whether a trademark is famous or not.

 

In lieu of setting up a “Famous Trade Marks List”, the working group recommended that famous trademark owners should be given a chance to pre-register their domain names before the new gTLD is opened to the general public. This proposal was accepted by the working group and was called the “Sunrise Proposal plus Twenty”.

 

Subsequently, Internet registrars suggested that the Sunrise Proposal plus Twenty should be extended to anyone with a registered trademark and/or service mark, as it would otherwise be discriminatory against trademark owners of non-famous marks.

 

E6.            DISPUTE RESOLUTION

 

Describe the policies for domain name and other dispute resolution.  If you are proposing variations to the policies followed in .com, .net, and .org, consider the following questions:

 

E6.1     To what extent are you proposing to implement the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy?

 

The dispute resolution policies in respect of the .TEL SLD and other disputes will be governed by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy (the “Policy”) as adopted by ICANN on 24 October 1999.  The Policy will be incorporated by reference into all Registration Agreements.  It is also intended that the Telnic’s website will set out a procedure to explain to registrants in a user-friendly manner how they can initiate proceedings under the Policy.

 

Telnic does not intend to participate in any dispute between a registrant and a third party, all proceedings will be administered by an approved ICANN dispute resolution provider (the “Provider”).   A list of the approved ICANN Providers will be made available to registrants by way of a hyperlink from Telnic’s website to the list maintained by ICANN.

 

In order to facilitate the dispute resolution process, Telnic will work with the Provider by developing an administration process to help ensure the smooth operation of the dispute resolution process.   As an example, Telnic will also allocate each complaint with a number upon receipt, and record the date and time of such receipt.  To assist the Provider, Telnic will confirm that the complainant is the registered domain name holder and that the complainant’s details are correct.  Telnic will also track the status of domain names which are the subject of a dispute and will block any attempt to transfer a domain name which is the subject of a dispute with a third party.

 

 E6.2    Please describe any additional, alternative, or supplemental dispute resolution procedures you are proposing.

 

Telnic is not proposing to adopt any additional, alternative or supplemental dispute resolution procedures.

 

E.7 Describe the proposed policies on Data Privacy, Escro and Whois Service

Policies in relation to Data Privacy, Escrow and Whois Service will be consistent both with existing policies in the .com, .net and .org TLDs and any and all relevant UK legislation.  As a result of European wide data protection regulations, Telnic has built into its privacy and personal data policies, the regulations introduced under the Data Protection Act 1998 (the “DPA”).  Personal data is data in which a living individual may be identified and as every SLD registration will involve the processing of personal data, Telnic is committed to observe all such legislation and future amendments or regulations. 

 

In order to maintain a free flow of information without breaching local legislation Telnic will obtain the consent of the registrants to process their information.  In order to address possible concerns about the processing of personal data, Telnic will explain in its Data Privacy Policy how such data will be used and why it is necessary.  Telnic will therefore ensure as far as is reasonable, that the active and informed consent of the registrants is obtained prior to registration of a domain name.  Telnic is committed both to abide by all relevant data protection and data privacy rules in the UK AND to the open and transparent movement of information over the Internet.

 

Telnic’s statement on privacy will feature both in the registration process and in reference to the terms and conditions.  It will feature as a link in the registration process where registrants will be asked to read the terms and conditions and the privacy policy and be asked to accept the terms or acknowledge consent both prior to registration and immediately before submission of billing information by clicking on an acceptance icon prior to the continuation of the transaction.

 

HOME PAGE

®

NAME AVAILABLE

®

REGISTRATION PAGE

®

PAYMENT PAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to Terms and Conditions and Data Privacy Policy

 

Registrants will be asked to tick that they have read the terms and conditions before they can proceed to the Payment Page.

 

After completing the credit card details but prior to sending the details, registrants will be asked again to tick a box stating that they have read the legal notices and that they acknowledge and consent to the use of their data as set out in those policies.

 

As Telnic will also be receiving personal data from its registrars, Telnic will ensure that the registrars abide by the same standards of data privacy and protection.  Telnic will ensure that the registrars have received the consent from their customers that enable Telnic to process such information on its Whois and Escrow services.

 

Telnic shall take reasonable steps to protect personal data from loss, misuse, unauthorized disclosure, alteration or destruction.  Telnic shall not use or authorize the use of personal data in a way that is incompatible with the notice provided to registrants.  In accordance with the DPA, all such information in relation to an individual’s personal data may be made available to the individual upon a written request.

 

Data Privacy Policy

 

1.      Telnic respects the privacy of all its customers and undertakes to comply with all applicable data privacy legislation in force from time to time.  Telnic complies with and is registered under the Data Protection Act 1998 and shall only process personal data in accordance with the rights of data subjects under the Act.  Telnic shall take all reasonable care to prevent any unauthorized access to your personal data.

 

2.      The information you provide when registering a domain name (or correcting or updating registration information) is required to allow the Internet to associate the domain name with your computer, to allow us to handle your account (including notifying you at renewal time), and to permit others operating or using the Internet to easily contact you to resolve issues that arise in connection with the domain name.

 

3.      By registering on this website and by disclosing your personal information to us, you consent to the collection, storage and processing of your personal information by Telnic in the manner set out in this Data Privacy Policy.

 

4.      When you register for a domain name with Telnic, you consent to your account, technical and billing information (including address, telephone and fax number and e-mail address) being published on the Whois database and web page.  The Whois database is a publicly accessible query based database of registered .TEL SLDs to enable visitors to check whether a name has been registered and by whom.  Such personal data may be available, subject to queries on the Whois web page, to individuals and organizations outside of the European Union.  By registration you consent further that your personal data may be transferred to/obtained by individuals or corporations outside of the European Economic Area, which do not have the same levels of data protection as the United Kingdom.

 

5.      When you register for a domain name with Telnic, you consent to your account, technical and billing information (including address, telephone and fax number and e-mail address) being stored under a data Escrow program. All personal data will be kept in Escrow so that in the event of any technical failure or loss of license to run the .TEL domain name there is a means to assure you of durable connectivity and a consistent service.

 

6.      Telnic will provide information you submit in registering a domain name or updating related information to our own employees and consultants, to the administrator of the registry for the .TEL to operators and users of the Internet making Whois queries concerning your domain-name registration, to ICANN, and to escrow agents, auditors, Whois service providers and replacement registrars that ICANN may designate.

 

7.      Telnic shall take reasonable steps to protect Personal Data from loss, misuse, unauthorized disclosure, alteration or destruction.  Telnic shall not use or authorize the use of Personal Data in a way that is incompatible with the notice provided to registrars.

 

8.      Telnic will not sell, rent, trade or give away any of its customers’ personal information (other than as stated above) to third parties for marketing purposes without their express consent.

 

9.      Telnic will use all reasonable endeavors to ensure that your personal data will not be kept, either by Telnic or in Escrow, for longer than is necessary for the purposes of maintaining the domain name.  In any event Personal Data will be kept for the duration of the agreement and for 3 years thereafter.  In the event that the domain name is surrendered or transferred to a third party, personal data relating to that domain name will not be kept for longer than is reasonable. 

 

10.  You represent and warrant that all information given is accurate and true.  You further maintain that you will inform Telnic of any changes that relate to the personal data which Telnic requires for the Whois.  Telnic will use all reasonable endeavors to ensure that the Personal Data it maintains will be accurate.

 

11.  Third party Internet sites that you can link to through any Telnic websites are not covered by our Privacy and security Policy, so we urge you to be careful when you enter any personal information online.  Telnic accepts no responsibility or liability for these sites.

 

12.  When you register details with Telnic, we use a secure server.  Any data you give us is encrypted using a ‘Secure Socket Layer’ (SSL) session.  SSL is an industry standard and is one of the best ways to ensure Internet messages are not intercepted.

 

Escrow Data

In order to maintain the stability of the Internet, Telnic will ensure that all information received through registrants and registrars will be kept in Escrow.  Telnic’s policy with respect to placing personal data in Escrow will mirror the approach adopted by NSI and ICANN in their Registry Agreement.  However, the US Department of Commerce will not be a party to this Agreement.  The Escrow Policy will be covered in the Telnic ICANN Registry Agreement and references to the placing of Personal Data into Escrow will be made in the Terms and Conditions and Data Privacy Policy in accordance with UK legislation.

 

In accordance with the data protection legislation in the United Kingdom, consent must be obtained from the data subject relating to their personal data being kept in Escrow and must not be held for an unnecessary length of time.  As a result, the Data Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions state that the personal information received by Telnic will further be forwarded into Escrow. 

 

Clause to be inserted into the Registry Agreement

 

“Telnic shall deposit into escrow all registry data on a schedule (not more frequently than weekly for a complete set of Registry Data, and daily for incremental updates) and in an electronic format mutually approved from time to time by Telnic and ICANN, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld by either party.  The escrow shall be maintained, at Telnic’s expense, by a reputable escrow agent mutually approved by Telnic and ICANN, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld by either party.  The escrow shall be held under an agreement between ICANN and Telnic, and the escrow agent providing that (A) the data shall be received and held in escrow, with no use other than verification that the deposited data is complete and in proper format, until released to ICANN; (B) the data shall be released to ICANN upon termination of this Agreement by ICANN under Section [x] or upon the Expiration Date if (1) this Agreement has not sooner been terminated and (2) it has been finally determined by the ICANN Board (and no injunction obtained pursuant to Section [y] has been obtained) that Telnic will not be designated as the successor registry under Section [z] of this Agreement.”

 

Whois Service

Telnic will maintain a free, open and transparent query based database of registered .TEL domain names to enable registrants to see who has registered a .TEL domain name.  Telnic will obtain the prior consents of the registrant in order to publish this information in accordance will relevant UK legislation. 

 

Clause to be inserted into the Registry Agreement

 

“Telnic shall provide an interactive web page and a [port 43 Whois service] providing free public query-based access to up-to-date (i.e. updated at least daily) registry database data which, in response to input of an SLD name, shall report at least the following data elements in response to queries:

 

1.      the SLD name registered;

2.      the TLD in which the SLD is registered;

3.      the IP address and corresponding names of the primary name server and secondary name server(s) for such SLD;

4.      the identity of the Sponsoring Registrar;

5.      the date of the most recent modification to the domain name record in the registry database;

6.      the original creation date of the registration;

7.      the expiration of the registration;

8.      the name and postal address of the SLD holder;

9.      the name, postal address, e-mail address, telephone number and (where available) the fax number of the technical contact for the SLD; and

10.  the name, postal address, e-mail address, telephone number and (where available) the fax number of the administrative contact for the SLD.”

 

E8.       Billing and Collection

The financial system chosen is Oracle Financials, due to its multi-user capabilities, platform independence, scalability and close relationship with the Oracle database itself. This enables the Console system to link in and provide instant statements of account, the ability to secure payment online, and seamlessly tie in with the general ledger.

 

The reporting structure of the Oracle Financials system is such that it is provided through a web interface, therefore, the reporting can be integrated within the Console system, supplying live key performance indicators to management, and optimizing project execution. Most, if not all financial reports will be generated by the Oracle Financials system.

 

The core server for the Financials system is a high-specification Sun Enterprise 420R server. It is secured behind the Cisco PIX firewall, and any reporting/manipulation will only be permissible to authorized personnel, administered via a username/password arrangement.

 

Email Billing & Reminders

The current proposed system allows for an automated setup of invoicing, reminders after a preset period, withholding of domains, and subsequent deletion.

 

The following boundary timescales would apply within this process:

 

Date

Process

Registration Date (r)

Invoice is issued with notice to pay by “r + 30 days”.

Expiry date e is set to r + 30 days.

Expiry Date (e)

Reminder is issued via email to billing contact

e + 14 days

Disconnection notice is issued via email to billing contact and administrative contact

e + 28 days

Domain is placed “on hold”

e + 42 days

Domain is released for re-registration

 

E.9 Services and Pricing

 

This information is considered commercially sensitive and we request that the information in this section should be kept confidential.

 

The structure of the sponsoring organization of Telnic (set out in E1 above and depicted at www.telnic.org) will be subject to ICANN approval of all steps to be taken in order to ensure full and open compliance with all delegated policy of the functions attached to the registrar of www.telnic.com.

 

The sponsoring organization will receive from registrars the sum of US $[x] per domain per annum and may, dependent on discussions with ICANN, request a sign-up fee of US $[y] per registrar together with an annual fee of US $[z]. These figures will need to be considered and negotiated with ICANN.

 

The registrar will fulfill a vital function in the pre-registration period and will receive US $200 for the first application to be made in respect of any domain name and US $50 for any subsequent application for that domain name. It is hoped that personal domains will, subject to approval and any relevant local legislation, become widely available eventually at costs of less than US $10 through Telnic’s role in serving the individual members of the global Internet community. Hence its primary role thereafter is expected to be in the rollout of personal telnames at very low cost to individuals and probably at costs which may make it uninteresting for commercial registrars to offer, although every effort would be made to encourage them to do so.

 

E9.1     *Pre-Registration Fee

 

This information is considered commercially sensitive and we request that the information in this section should be kept confidential.

 

Pre-registration of qualifying trademarks (Please refer to section E5.2 above) will entail a significant amount of verification that will be costly. The benefits and safeguards of pre-registration are compelling, if only in the context of prevention is better (and less costly) than cure. The charge for this activity is a set, and one-off payment of US$200.

 

This fee will cover all aspects of processing pre-registrations in their entirety. But it will exclude any rare protracted dispute costs that may occur, which will be borne primarily by a complainant.

 

* The Pre-Registration service is dependent on verification and clearance from ICANN and/or other involved authorities.

 

E9.2     Main Fee Structure

 

This information is considered commercially sensitive and we request that the information in this section should be kept confidential.

 

The main fee structure will derive revenue from sponsoring organization fees of between US $10 and US $5 (volume dependent) chargeable to registrars covers both:

 

(a)    Registration of a second-level domain name in .TEL, and

(b)   Maintenance of a second-level domain name in. TEL. 

 

E9.3     Transfer of Domain Fee

 

On submission of the correct information on the valid Telnic Domain Name Transfer Form, a single fee will apply to each actionable transfer. This fee will be set at US $5 per submission.


E9.4       Modification of Record Fee

 

On submission of the correct information on the valid Telnic Modification of Record Form, a single fee will apply to each actionable modification. This fee will be set at US $5 per submission.

 

E9.5       Subsidized .TEL domain names

 

Telnic intends to consider and implement a series of policy decisions that will help and assist organizations such as charities and other good causes. This will probably include fee reductions or similar formulae. These issues are to be fully dealt with by the Telnic PAB. It also intends to discuss with ICANN a proposal to introduce a very low cost domain dedicated for the use of private individuals in the form person.pp.tel and at the third level behind ccSLDs.

 

E9.6  Fee structures for Dispute Procedures


Due to the time-consuming and often delicate nature of handling dispute procedures, and the need to ensure that the Disputes Procedures are not abused, and entered into in a responsible manner, a single fee will be set. This will be discussed with ICANN in order to ensure that this fee is kept as low as possible commensurate with the responsibilities and terms of the delegated authority.

 

Services and Pricing: other policy factors and declarations


·        All the above fees exclude purchase taxes or other similar taxes that may apply.


·        The Telnic PAB will advise on all Pricing Policy concerning registrar commitment levels, including pricing structures that will apply in the ‘Phase 2’ of the Telnic implementation program and rollout. This will include domains issued by ccSLD lead registrars. Pricing Policy revues will be held on at least a 12 monthly cycle.


·        As stated, certain blocks of .TEL domain names will be quarantined for reasons of deferred policy decisions, or as protection because they may be generic and clash with the pre-registration program. Telnic may decide to initiate a selective and premium Pricing Policy regarding quarantined domain names. This will be decided down-stream. Other options are set out inn E10.

 

·        Other relating financial aspects (e.g. spreadsheets and projections).

 

·        Pricing Policy and duration of fees may be affected by any ICANN parameters covering negotiated terms and/or licenses.

 

·        Fast-track services positioned at premium rates may be implemented at some future point.

 

All registry services, unless defined otherwise, will be supplied as integral to the respective and stated fee(s).

 

E.10  OTHER

 

Telnic Policy Advisory Board

 

1.            Purpose

 

Telnic intends to create a Policy Advisory Board (the “PAB”) to review policy and advise Telnic’s management and, if appropriate, to also advise Telnic’s registrars on matters directly relating to the performance, function and management of .TEL domain names.  The PAB’s functions will include reviewing and making decisions on the following policies:

 

·        the distribution of SLDs and ccSLDs (and sub-levels) and their restricted and/or unrestricted status;

·        identifying categories of restricted terms as outlined in E3 above;

·        ICANN issues and policy;

·        the issues and policies of other recognised authorities, for example, WIPO; and

·        any charitable work undertaken by Telnic through its Foundation.

 

It is envisaged that the PAB’s policies will (as appropriate) encompass the policies and current thinking of the Internet’s recognised authorities together with the policies developed in-house by the PAB.

 

2.            Composition

 

The PAB will be composed of a Chairman and not less than 3 and no more than 10 members.  It is hoped that ICANN will be represented on the PAB, which will meet in full four times a year and will hold regular smaller meetings to study particular issues. 

 

3.            Standards

 

The members of the PAB will have collective responsibility for the operation of the PAB and they will:

 

·        engage in collective consideration of the issues that may arise in respect of the performance, function and management of the .TEL SLDs, taking into account the full range of relevant factors, including any guidance issued by the ICANN or such other relevant recognised authorities;

·        respond appropriately to any complaints received; and

·        ensure that the PAB does not exceed its powers or functions.

 


4.            Consultation

 

The PAB intends to hold twice-yearly public consultations at which interested parties can voice any concerns and give help on any topics causing difficulties.  The PAB may consider that the use of an open forum (such as posting information on its website) for public consultation is important to ensure its openness and transparency.  The voice of interested parties is important to Telnic in respect of the development of .TEL and the stability of the domain name system.

 

E10. OTHER

 

General Utilisation of Existing Policies

 

Telnic’s comprehensive response to its policy formation and its use of existing policies is contained in E1 above.  However, by way of summary, it is Telnic’s intention to adopt a number of the existing ICANN policies.  As demonstrated in its TLD Application, Telnic intends to follow the model adopted by the majority of registries/registrars operating already, in that it will look to ICANN for guidance.  Telnic will adopt a number of policies including, for example, the ICANN dispute resolution policy, a data protection and privacy policy, an equal opportunities policy, and a transfer of domain name and transfer of registrar policies.   Should Telnic have a requirement to modify any of the existing ICANN policies (for example, to comply with the law) then it proposes to do so through consultation with ICANN and the necessary authorities of competent jurisdiction.

 

Telnic is conscious of ICANN’s concern with respect to the introduction of a new TLD and the potential effect that this may have upon (including, but without limitation) the stability of the Internet, the DNS, competition and the protection of third party intellectual property rights.    It is Telnic’s objective to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, such adverse effects by the development and deployment of its Policy Advisory Board (the “PAB”).  The policies adopted by Telnic will be managed, reviewed and modified by the PAB as appropriate.  The PAB’s public consultation process together with the membership of the PAB being from Internet, legal and business backgrounds (including ICANN) has been designed to reduce such adverse effects on the operation of a new TLD.   

 

E10             OTHER        

 

.TEL Quarantine

 

.TEL provides a unique opportunity to introduce a new non-conflicting TLD in a balanced, stable and coordinated manner, that is free from many previous problems and divisions. To this end a staged and measured implementation of all levels of .TEL is without question the way to proceed.

 

If the entire namespace of .TEL is opened before important factors are considered and discussed, involving contribution and input from all corners of the Internet community - the opportunity will be irrevocably lost.

 

It is Telnic’s firm belief that a phased approach is necessary, an approach that will constructively use temporary quarantining to allow a gradual and measured implementation of all levels. For these reasons, our organization intends initiating an interim quarantining of the following categories (as below) in the first stages of the .TEL rollout.

 

By quarantining, we mean withholding from registration and allocation any .TEL domain names (characters or digits) until they are released as a result of a correct process via the Policy Advisory Board. The challenge is to do this in a moderated and fair way that is sympathetic to the various needs of the Internet community.

 

As stated, we intend temporarily quarantining in the initial rollout phase - and in some cases beyond - the following:

 

q          Up to four characters/digits;

q          Key generic words/phrases/characters/digits that may meet a special sub domain need – e.g. police.tel;

q          Key words/characters/digits that may have a special sub domain value. These would essentially be generic and other words that are free from intellectual property rights that can be openly auctioned. Please see ‘Auctioning’; and

q          Words and/or phrases that Telnic considers to be abusive, offensive and/or obscene.

 

The benefits are clear. By a gradual coordinated rollout the pieces of the overall namespace structure can be constructed as a model that is lasting and stable, mostly free from fragmentation, distortions, and abuses. In this process our organization will not restrict or hinder enterprise, but merely make sure, in a limited way, that the namespace of .TEL is created and managed properly

 

E.10 Other

 

Auctioning .TEL Domain Names

 

Our organization believes that there is a strong case in favor of auctioning certain specific and limited .TEL domain names in the early stages of rollout. These domain names would be earmarked and drawn for auctioning from the “clean” pool of names and characters/digits held over in quarantine (please see ‘Quarantine’).

 

A high proportion of the proceeds from auctioning of any .TEL domain-names would go to either the Telnic foundation (Please refer to the Foundation in C.6.1) and/or directly to ICANN for the benefit of the Internet as a whole.

 

Such auctions would be transitional and not ongoing or long-term. Once a domain name is auctioned and the auction sum settled, no other mandated charges will apply, only the successive standard and normal maintenance fees to keep the domain name in question live and updated.

 

The reasoning behind .TEL auctions is clear, it is to:

 

a)         Efficiently manage the .TEL namespace, and to fairly release monies back for the common-good of the Internet and Internet community, and

 

b)        Prevent a chaotic land-grab of domain-names by speculators.

 

As with all Telnic Sponsoring Organization’s business, all auctioning decisions and activities will be transparent and accountable. Special attention will obviously need to be given to ensuring that both enterprise and innovation is not adversely affected by such auctions.

 

This somewhat sensitive element of the proposal will naturally need to be discussed with ICANN in due course.

 

E10.            OTHER

 

Statement of Employment & Equal Opportunity

 

Telnic is an equal opportunity employer.  It is Telnic’s policy to ensure equal opportunity for all qualified candidates and employees and to treat them without discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender, nationality, ethnic origin, disability or marital status.  The policy of equal employment opportunity applies to all employment practices, including but not limited to recruitment, advertising, promotion, terms and conditions of employment, performance appraisals, social and recreational programmes, training, employee development, compensation, redeployment and termination.

 

In addition, any candidate or employee filing a discrimination claim or assisting in the investigation of alleged discrimination shall be protected from any form of coercion, intimidation, victimisation or discrimination.

 

Because this policy is central to the manner in which Telnic operates as an employer, any employees who have questions or concerns regarding the application of this or any other employment policy - or believe that they have been discriminated against, harassed or treated unfairly – are urged to bring this matter to the attention of a member of Human Resources.

 

E10.            OTHER

 

Transfer Policy Statement

 

Telnic will maintain a transfer policy which will allow any and all registrants to assign and/or otherwise transfer their domain names to another person if they so wish, provided that at the time of the assignment and/or transfer the registrant, who wishes to assign the rights in the domain name, is the rightful owner of the domain name.  Telnic shall provide a Domain Name Change Agreement on its website, which may be completed and executed by the current registrant and the prospective registrant for this purpose. Telnic will not get involved in any discussion and/or communication with the current and/or prospective registrant in respect of any transfer of a domain name between current and prospective registrants. Telnic will let the parties reach an agreement in respect of transferring the domain name without any involvement on its part. 

 

Telnic is conscious of ICANN’s position regarding the need for competition among registries and/or registrars with respect to gTLDs to ensure the furtherance and development of the Internet.  Therefore, Telnic’s transfer policy will permit registrants to transfer their domain name registration(s) from one .TEL registry and/or registrar to another .TEL registry and/or registrar, if they so wish.      

 

II            Registration Policies During The Start-Up Period

 

E11            Describe policies proposed for start-up phase of registrations in the TLD

 

E11.     It is inevitable that when the registry goes live and actually starts issuing .TEL domain names, there will in the normal course of events be a very large rush for domain names. As we outline elsewhere – in particular at E 5.2 -  Telnic is developing solutions in two areas :-

 

PRE-LAUNCH PERIOD

The initial launch will only allow the issuance of second-level domain names but it will be preceded by a period dedicated to pre-registrations by registered trademark and service mark owners, which will be allowed for a period of two months prior to the registry actually issuing any domain names “live”. Each pre-registration will have to be accompanied by an on-line non-refundable payment. The essential rules governing pre-registration will be made extremely clear on the website and anyone applying to pre-register will have to agree to such terms prior to being able to make any payment. A format similar to the normal acceptance of license conditions during a typical installation of new software will be used. During the pre-registration period, it will be possible for more than one application to be made in respect of any particular domain name. Would-be registrants will be advised of the number of pre-registration applications which have already been received for any given domain name before they make any payment.  The making of a pre-registration application will not confer any right to expect that an application will be successful. If only one application for a particular domain name has been received during the pre-registration period, the registry shall grant that application upon the launch of the registry going live.

 

This pre-launch procedure should play a significant role in reducing the initial post-launch interest from cybersquatters.

 

E12.     POST-LAUNCH

The TLD’s start-up could reasonably be regarded as likely to be of about three months duration and it would essentially be a time during which significant surges of look-up and registration activity could be expected.

 

It is obviously desirable to try to reduce the heavy demand for domain names which might otherwise occur after the website enables actual registration live on-line.

 

During the pre-launch period the website will provide clear guidance as to the implementation and rollout strategy post-launch. Such guidance will make it plain that key words will have been quarantined in order to ensure a well-distributed rollout and the unavailability of entries on the quarantine list should have a beneficial effect on traffic levels.

 

Telnic is currently examining the phasing of registrations according to the length of the SLD. Thus for first week only applications for domain names of more than thirty characters (excluding the “.TEL”) will be entertained. For the second week, the limit will be twenty to thirty characters and for the third week it will be ten to nineteen characters (all excluding the “.TEL”). Only thereafter will it be possible to pre-register names of five to nine characters.

 

These restrictions will be well publicized and will be prominent on the front page of Telnic’s website.

 

An alternative is to restrict registration for the first two weeks to domains starting with P to Z inclusive and for the next two weeks to domains starting with H to O inclusive and thereafter open up A to G inclusive.

 

Telnic has prepared capacity plans to handle the following projection.  Telnic expects that there will be in excess of 5,000 pre-registrations on the first day and in excess of 30,000, 60,000 and 80,000 at the end of the first week, month and two months respectively.

 

E13      What limits if any are being proposed on registrants and how will they be implemented

 

It is not proposed to place any limits on the number of registrations which can be made by any one registrant or any registrar, bearing in mind that the registrar network will not be introduced until the second phase. In practice, an alert will be set up on the master database to advise if an abnormally large number of registrations are being made by any particular registrant, who can be identified through any one or more of a number of key fields, including credit card details. Registrars would be subject to the terms of their agreements with the Registry and it is expected to appoint a registrar for each second-level country domain e.g. uk.tel. The fact that the rollout of country SLDs will be phased should reduce the large imbalances which can otherwise occur.

 

E14            Describe mechanisms to dampen demand

 

Pricing mechanisms will not be used to dampen the initial rush for domains but please see E10 and E12 above.

 

E15      Will we be offering any “Sunrise” Period?

The sunrise period is described in E11 above.

 

Telnic proposes to consult with the Policy Advisory Board and with ICANN about the merits of offering a natural progression for existing domain name owners to acquire with priority a telname comprising their existing domain with .TEL as a suffix. So the owner of company.com would be entitled to company.com.tel when the com.tel SLD is rolled out. This procedure has the advantage that it gives existing SLD owners some degree of certainty and is likely to cause less confusion as users come to realize that a company can be contacted by adding the tel suffix to its domain name. It may be that some existing domain name owners will try to secure both theirname.com.tel and theirname.tel – but if “theirname” is a common name or is the subject of registered trademarks belonging to different companies, then they would have priority for the former but may not be successful in the latter. The fact of entitlement should tend to discourage existing SLD owners from rushing to take out a priority domain name and the uptake is likely to be more orderly and controlled.

 

                        III          Registration Restrictions

 

E.16/

E.17     Detail registration restrictions being proposed

 

Perhaps the most obvious difference between a series of numbers and a domain name is that the domain name can be used to convey an immediate message about the user of the number. It may indicate where someone lives or works or it may indicate the nature of their business. It is also very easy to remember. For by far the greatest part, the proposed new TLD of .TEL should remain unrestricted and open to all. But the descriptive nature of domain names can be abused. The launch of a new TLD, especially one pointing specifically at communication, presents the internet community with a challenge – how to ensure that when and where it really matters, the descriptive power of domain names should not be abused.  

 

The domain name of hemsted.kent.sch.uk.tel tells the caller that the user is the Hemsted school in Kent, United Kingdom. Someone calling plymouth.police.uk.tel should be confident that they will in fact speak to the police in Plymouth rather than to someone who just happens to have acquired the domain name. As telnames become more established it is important that confidence in the structure of the new gTLD also grows. People should be able to use the new domain and know that key structural elements of society have not been “impersonated”.

 

The public confidence in the new gTLD of .TEL would be immeasurably greater if the sponsoring organization behind it restricted the issue and use of certain names or terms below certain key words/terms at any level. Where the public expects a substantial element of integrity to be associated with an organization, service, profession or vocation it is the duty of Telnic to respond accordingly. Key public services and services offering emergency services require similar protection. 

 

Such a move would be a necessary contribution on the part of the Internet towards offering a credible long-term alternative to conventional numbering. Whilst Telnic is keen to consult closely with ICANN and the Policy Advisory Board which it intends to set up and which is described in E 10 above, it is felt that a quarantine list of such SLD’s should be drawn up and that whilst quarantined at SLD level, they should be included in delegation to national registrars. Subject to ICANN’s agreement, the proper course in order to avoid abuse might then be to reserve a domain such as police.fr.tel to the national registrar responsible for France with delegated authority to issue only to an appropriate police authority in France. That police authority would, of course, be a suitable recipient of such a domain because it would ensure correct and proper use of the domain name or any sub-domain. Similarly, the domain of law.au.tel might be suitably overseen by the appropriate professional body responsible for the legal profession in Australia.

 

It is for consideration by the Policy Advisory Board as to whether existing gTLDs should be reserved at second level behind .TEL in order to provide a priority migration path for owners of existing domain names thus: - the owner of the domain xxx.com might be able to claim priority to xxx.com.tel. This would result in the strengths of credibility and predictability on the part of the Internet community at large and in a relatively straightforward progression to .TEL for an existing domain name which is already restricted – because the practical effect would be simply to add .TEL as a suffix. 

 

As is set out elsewhere, all second-level domain names of 4 characters or less will be reserved to the authoritative database so that all existing ccTLD’s can be issued to national registrars at the second level in the phased roll-out. This will also allow the issue of third level telnames below existing and future gTLDs entered as gSLDs on the database. ICANN’s views will be sought on the feasibility of protecting possible future gTLDs exceeding 4 characters in length which may be issued in the future.

 

This is so that the priority migration path of a domain.com to a domain.com.tel can be maintained.

 

In order to try to be fair and equal to all in the issue of telnames, it should be noted that names of countries, states, cities, large towns and other key geographical features as well as certain generic locator terms (e.g. home.tel) should be reserved to the authoritative database at both second and third levels (behind ccSLDs) on a multilingual format. This is so that there can be equal access to xxx.miami.us.tel or xxx.geneva.tel. This should greatly assist in the ability of users to acquire a telname that will readily identify him or her. The available domains open to those with a relatively common name will be much greater if users have the option to select a third-level name behind the name of the city, town or state in which they live. The consequence of this is that it should be easier for others to contact them and remember their telname if their domain includes their place of abode or work.

 

Telnic believes that all country names in long and short form should be withheld on a multilingual basis. The long form e.g. france.tel would not be issued without ICANN’s approval so as not to conflict with or dilute ISO 3166 codes but they could be held in reserve for possible future use.

 

In summary, subject to the recommendations of the Policy Advisory Board and to the approval of ICANN, the following principles would apply: -

 

1.                  Certain groups of names would be quarantined or reserved to the authoritative database as set out above (and see also E 10).

2.                  Domains which describe functions, roles activities or professions of importance to society as a whole e.g. “police” should be delegated to national registrars as third level domains behind ccSLDs with a mandate to ensure that they are only issued to appropriate organizations which can oversee their proper use.

 

E.18    

 

During the application process, if an applicant requests a domain which has been reserved to the master database in order to ensure equal access for all to its sub-domains e.g. a city name, the applicant will be advised that the domain itself is not available but that a sub-domain would be available and the applicant will then be invited to take out a sub-domain.

 

If the applicant requests an “integrity” domain such as “police”, they will be referred to guidelines explaining the policy outlined above and they will be told how to apply for that domain if they feel they qualify. 

 

E. 19            Describe the enforcement procedures and mechanisms for ensuring registrants meet the registration requirements.

 

Telnic envisages that it will restrict the registration of certain third level country code domain names such as “police.uk.tel” or “doctor.uk.tel”.  The rationale behind such restriction is an attempt to ensure that the integrity of the specified registration is maintained.  These third level domain names will be restricted in the sense that they will only be allocated to, using the latter example above, a professional medical organization based in the United Kingdom. In due course these issues will be considered by Telnic’s PAB, but as an example it could transpire that for example the UK based medical organization would in turn be allowed to allocate further sub-level domains to other individuals and/or organizations, as they see fit, provided always that they uphold the “integrity” of their third level domain name.  This means, for instance, that a general practitioner would not be able to issue a fourth level domain name consisting of “.doctor.uk.tel” to, say, a hair and beauty treatment center. 

 

Telnic believes that by developing the market by enabling certain organizations to issue fourth level country code domain names to professional, public and/or governing bodies such as, say, the National Health Service (“NHS”) in respect of “.hospital.uk.tel” and the Law Society for “.law.uk.tel” the integrity of such a domain name can be maintained to its highest level, as these organizations will have the capability of ensuring that all of the registration requirements are met by the potential domain name registrants for such restricted domain names.

 

If this approach is adopted, it will be achieved in accordance with the policies developed by Telnic’s Policy Advisory Board (the “PAB”).

 

E.20            Describe any appeal procedure from denial of registration.

 

Currently, Telnic is not in a position whereby it can confirm:

 

1.         whether it will introduce an appeal procedure which will allow registrants to challenge Telnic’s decisions not to register a restricted third level country code domain name; and

2.         if it does introduce any appeal procedures what they will be.

 

The reasons why Telnic has not yet taken a firm view on how it wishes to deal with this issue are set out below:

 

1.         the number of potential appeals filed by unsuccessful registrants may be so substantial that Telnic may not be able to manage properly all such appeals/complaints for logistical reasons;

2.            assuming that Telnic will introduce complaints/appeals procedures in respect of the restricted third level domain names, the question arises who will deal with such complaint/appeals ( i.e. will Telnic appoint an independent body or set up an internal body that will be able to deal with such complaints); and

3.         on what basis will unsuccessful registrants be allowed to file an appeal against Telnic’s decision to reject the registration of a restricted third level domain name? 

 

These are all questions which need careful consideration and deliberation. Therefore, should Telnic become the registry for the new .TEL domain name it envisages that the PAB will review these issues and advise Telnic’s management and, if appropriate, to also advise Telnic’s registrars (including those professional, public and/or governing bodies enabled by Telnic to issue fourth level domain names) on how complaints/appeals by unsuccessful registrants should be dealt with. The PAB’s functions will include among other things reviewing and making decisions on the following policies:

 

·        the distribution of SLDs and ccSLDs (and sub-levels) and their restricted and/or unrestricted status;

·        ICANN issues and policy; and

·        the issues and policies of other recognized authorities, for example, WIPO.

 

It is envisaged that the PAB’s policies will (as appropriate) encompass the policies and current thinking of the Internet’s recognized authorities together with the policies developed in-house by the PAB.

 

For the time being therefore, Telnic proposes that this issue be discussed and considered in the future, should it become necessary.

 

E.21            Describe any procedure that permits third parties to seek cancellation of a TLD registration for failure to comply with the restrictions.

 

Telnic does not envisage introducing any procedures which will allow third parties to seek cancellations of .TEL domain names on the basis that a registrant of such a domain name has failed to comply with the restrictions of a particular restricted domain name. 

 

Telnic intends to deal with this problem by issuing partially restricted third level country code domain names such as “.police.uk.tel”, which need to be restricted for integrity reasons, to reputable and recognized professional, public and/or governing organizations whose responsibility it will be to issue further sub-level domain names. These professional, public and/or governing organizations (such as Scotland Yard, the NHS and/or the Law Society) will be responsible for ensuring that further sub-level domain names consisting of the partially restricted third party country code domain names are only issued to such individuals and/or organizations and/or other entities which satisfy the registration requirements of such restricted third party country code domain names.  Special attention will need to be given in the formulation of such policies.

 

By placing this responsibility on organizations that are able to ensure that the individuals and/or organizations satisfy the requirements of the restricted domain names, there should, theoretically, be no need for third parties to cancel another party’s domain name registration. However, if the responsible organization finds that a restricted domain name has been issued to an individual and/or organization that has not satisfied the registration requirements, it is envisaged by Telnic that the organization shall have the right to cancel such registration in accordance with the policy still to be considered and adopted by Telnic.

 

If this approach is adopted, it will be achieved in accordance with the policies developed by Telnic’s Policy Advisory Board (the “PAB”).

 

IV          Context of the TLD within the DNS

 

E.22/23            What will distinguish the TLD from existing or other proposedTLDs? How will this distinction be beneficial?

 

.TEL is not another .com.

 

Telnic’s proposed new .TEL TDL is envisaged to:

 

  • be very specific to voice-video-data;
  • sit within DNS without any conflict whatsoever;
  • be globally synonymous with what it does;
  • provide a “clean-slate” domain name that can be introduced in a co-ordinated and measured manner; and
  • carry a minimized element of IPR* problems and contentions.

 

.TEL will be used for name based addressing for telephony style services.  The use of .TEL will enable both software applications and their users to simply, quickly and correctly identify addresses for video and voice telephony applications.  It is this clarity for consumers, developers and operators that justifies the establishment of a new TLD to support these applications.  This clarity will in turn stimulate the faster development and adoption of the new generation of Internet based voice and video telephony services that are now emerging.

 

.TEL is for communication. And it will work on multiple devices. When you access any SLD, you almost automatically expect to see a web page – with .TEL you are likely to talk to someone.

 

A .TEL voice-video-data communications gTLD will provide choice, control, and transparency to individuals and businesses, and it will move communication-addressing forward - beyond traditional one-dimensional telephone codes and numbering that are still predominantly controlled as state monopolies in most countries. It will assist in breaking down barriers as we enter an era where IP will become mainstream and permanent in homes, offices and the mobile world.

 

When presented with the name address john.smith.anycompany.tel, the application will know that it is about to use the DNS to lookup an IP address for the H.323 style communication that it is about to initiate.  The service operators (ISPs and telcos) understand immediately how to handle the service request.  The application developer understands how to initiate and interact with the DNS following the request. And most importantly, the consumer understands that this address john.smith.anycompany.tel is the address that they need to use if they wish to use the internet rather than the PSTN to set up a video or voice telephony call.

 

In contrast to many existing or proposed new TLDs, .TEL does not impinge or conflict with any other TLD.  For example, .WEB conflicts with .COM or .NET, in the sense that registrants may not be sure which TLD they should use when registering their domain names because they may all be perceived to be “in the same space”.

 

“TEL” is synonymous globally - almost without exception - with communicating-by-voice, and .TEL will be the Internet address synonymous with the distinct and growing Internet demand for a dedicated voice-video-data DNS.

 

.TEL is a “green-field” TLD, one which if approached properly, with sufficient resources, will allow the coordinated creation of a robust and stable structure that will gain from previous DNS lessons and experiences. Telnic intends to manage the development in a systematic and measured fashion considering all aspects.

 

* Telnic has ensured that “.TEL” cannot be abused, boxed-in or hijacked through any IPR activities that would adversely affect, de-stabilize or delay the introduction of the TLD for the benefit of all.

 

E24. What community and/or market will be served or targeted by this TLD? To what extent is that community or market already served by the DNS?

 

Rather than addressing the needs of a specific vertical market segment, the use of .TEL is designed to horizontally address the market, by adding a new service layer to support Internet based video and voice telephony.  Generally, early adopters will tend to be those with permanent connections to the Internet – those always on.  These consumers – in business and at home – have the immediate ability to leverage their existing investment in their permanent connection to the Internet.  They can add these new services to their connection.  But to use these new services effectively, they need a quick, simple and error free addressing scheme.  This will be provided through the use of .TEL and the DNS.

 

However we see a powerful range of applications being developed in the short term supporting the needs of those who access the Internet through dynamic IP ranges.  Within these communities of dial-up, mobile and peripatetic consumers, there are a range of unique challenges that .TEL can address.  These are the users that either:

 

1.      Have no established/permanent IP address, but use dynamic IPs from the same ISP; or

2.      Have no permanent IP address, and use dynamic IPs from different providers and/or gateways; or

3.      Have permanent IPs, but in different locations from different providers in a set pattern; or

4.      Have permanent IPs, but from different providers with no set pattern.

 

The DNS serves these communities well for the current range of server based services.  However the introduction of new generations of services and applications for voice and video telephony that are essentially client-to-client – that are person to person – presents new challenges.  These will be met through the evolution of the DNS to support and enable these applications.  The first step in this evolution is through the introduction of the .TEL TLD.

 

E.25       Please describe in detail how your proposal would enable the DNS to meet presently unmet needs.

 

There are two major areas where the introduction of .TEL will enable the DNS to grow and evolve.  These are:

 

1.      Provide a clear, simple and correct name based addressing for internet based video and voice telephony services; and

2.      Provide a platform for the development, deployment, operation and use of new generations of voice and video communication value added services.

 

E.26       How would the introduction of the TLD enhance the utility of the DNS for Internet users? For the community served by the TLD?

 

The introduction of .TEL enables two major developments for the Internet.  Firstly, .TEL enables the effective development, deployment, operation and use of video and voice telephony services across the Internet.  And secondly, .TEL enables the introduction of new generations of voice and video communication value added services based upon the DNS.

 

Therefore .TEL both supports the deployment of new services through the existing DNS infrastructure whilst at the same time providing the existing DNS infrastructure with the room to develop new specialized features and therefore to grow.

 

E.27       How would the proposed TLD enhance competition in domain-name registration services, including competition with existing TLD registries?

 

Essentially .TEL is envisaged as complimentary to existing TLD registries rather than competitive.  It is planned to use a selection of the existing registrars to operate the service.  They in turn will use the existing distribution structure.

 

Unlike other existing or proposed mainstream gTLDs .TEL will promote competition on a wide variety of levels:

 

1.      Opens a new and dedicated namespace - uninhibited by existing addressing models - that will stimulate diversity resulting in competition.

 

2.      By introducing .TEL in a co-ordinated and measured fashion it will create competition on a level playing-field from the beginning without fragmentation or confusion.

 

3.      The TLD will have clearly enshrine freedom of portability principles - with any restrictions that may apply.

 

Telnic are committed to a level-playing field of the distribution of .TEL. The distribution channels will be in alignment and underpinned by an Accredited Registrar structure. Telnic will not deviate from the enshrined principle of stability in this.

 

 

V          Value of proposal as proof of concept

 

E.28            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?

We believe that the introduction of .TEL will prove two concepts in relation to the evolution of the DNS.  These are:

 

1.      That a simple clear and consumer friendly addressing scheme is required to support the widespread adoption of Internet voice & video telephony (please see scope annexed letter from Ericsson Limited).

2.      That the DNS can be used as an enabling technology for the development, deployment and operation of a wide range of value added Internet voice and video telephony services.

 

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?

 

We believe that the success of the introduction of .TEL can be measured by a number of indicators at each stage: 

 

·        In the short term (6-18 months), success can be measured through the expressions of support by telcos, service operators and application developers. 

·        In the medium term (12-36 months), success can be measured through the number of corporate and personal registrations in the .TEL name space. 

·        In the long term (24+ months), success can be measured through the breadth of .TEL enabled services deployed; through the change in rate of expansion of Internet voice and video telephony services and through the volume of .TEL lookups.

 

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

This process would give some indication of the direction and evolution of the Internet and the DNS in the future.  It will give a focus to the measurement of real-time services that the Internet will be transporting in the future.  An indication of the impact of a permanently connected world – personal, home and work - on the core addressing and routing infrastructure of the internet. 

 

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

.TEL is complimentary to the existing TLD name space.  It expands the function of the DNS.  It adds texture to the rich experience of Internet users.  It adds simplicity, clarity and stability to an emerging industry.  It enables the growth of new generations of value added services. .TEL will gradually expand the frontiers for mobile internet-enabled devices.

 

The Internet world at large - and the worlds of telecommunications and computing that are converging and migrating to the Internet - urgently need a dedicated TLD and framework that is specific to the particular needs of voice-video-data.

 

.TEL is unlike any other existing or proposed new TLD. It merits special consideration because it is unique, and the advantages so distinct. The facts speak for themselves:


 

 

.TEL

.WEB / .INFO / .SHOP /
.TRAVEL / .LAW /  etc…

 

 

 

Avoids conflict with other TLDs – especially with .COM and .NET

 

YES

 

NO

Benefits the global Internet community – from less developed countries to advanced countries

 

YES

 

NO

Creates innovation, enriches and pushes the Internet to new frontiers

 

YES

 

NO

Meets new technological demands relevant to the Internet and DNS

 

YES

 

NO

 


Any documents referred to above have been attached (in the same sequence below) hereto and include:

 

1.         the Pre-Registration Agreement (Proposal 1);

2.         the Pre-Registration Agreement (Proposal 2);

3.         the Registration Agreement (Post-Launch);

4.         the Domain Name Change Agreement;

5.         the Data Privacy Policy;

6.         the Website Terms and Conditions;

7.         the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy;

8.         the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy;

9.         the sample web page relating to trademarks, passing off and cybersquatting;

10.       a copy of the Ericsson Limited letter.