Bureaucrats, staff, Administrators
8,157
edits
Changes
no edit summary
|language =
|language =
|translation =
|translation =
|registryprovider =
|registryprovider =[[Demand Media]]
|registrations =
|registrations =
|date =
|date =
|category = [[:Category:Professional New gTLDs|Professional]]
|category = [[:Category:Professional New gTLDs|Professional]]
|community =
|community =
|priority = 1362 - [[Donuts]] (Spring Frostbite, LLC)
|PIC = [https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/890 Download Here]
|priority =
|keypeople =
|keypeople =
}}
}}
The French representative also warned the related [[.archi]] as a architect-centric domain.
The French representative also warned the related [[.archi]] as a architect-centric domain.
Donuts replied to France´s warnings to [[.architect]], and its objections for [[.health]], [[.sarl]], and [[.vin]], with an impassioned defense of the validity of open registration for New gTLDs. In the case of .architect it notes that there are many other people and organizations that may identify as an "architect" other than those structural architects who have their title regulated by French law. For example, Donuts points to its application, which references software architects, landscape architects, etc. It further notes that restricting registration unfairly assumes malfeasance on the part of the registrant, that no such restrictions exist for related domains in any exisiting gTLDs or ccTLDs, and that verification and restriction would inevitably raise the price of registration significantly. They write, "We do not want to disenfranchise all users of a term by limiting its use to the most common category of usage." They go on to quote the GAC's own advice with regards to its contract with [[.xxx]] registry provider, [[ICM Registry]], which notes that at that time the GAC was against any monitoring of TLD content given that it seems to overstep ICANN's technical mandate.<ref>[http://donuts.co/news/files/donuts_reply_to_france_ARCHITECT_HEALTH_HOTEL_SARL_VIN.pdf Donuts reply to France, donuts.co]Published February 5 2013, Retrieved 8 Feb 2013</ref>
Donuts replied to France´s warning to .architect, and its similar objections for [[.health]], [[.sarl]], [[.hotel]] and [[.vin]], with an impassioned defense of the validity of open registration for New gTLDs. In the case of .architect it notes that there are many other people and organizations that may identify as an "architect" other than those structural architects who have their title regulated by French law. For example, Donuts points to its application, which references software architects, landscape architects, etc. It further notes that restricting registration unfairly assumes malfeasance on the part of the registrant, that no such restrictions exist for related domains in any exisiting gTLDs or ccTLDs, and that verification and restriction would inevitably raise the price of registration significantly. They write, "We do not want to disenfranchise all users of a term by limiting its use to the most common category of usage." They go on to quote the GAC's own advice with regards to its contract with [[.xxx]] registry provider, [[ICM Registry]], which notes that at that time the GAC was against any monitoring of TLD content given that it seems to overstep ICANN's technical mandate.<ref>[http://donuts.co/news/files/donuts_reply_to_france_ARCHITECT_HEALTH_HOTEL_SARL_VIN.pdf Donuts reply to France, donuts.co]Published February 5 2013, Retrieved 8 Feb 2013</ref>
===Application Details===
==Community Objection==
The International Architectural Union (IAU) filed a community objection against the application.<ref>[http://www.iccwbo.org/products-and-services/arbitration-and-adr/expertise/icann-new-gtld-dispute-resolution/pending-cases/ Pending Cases, ICCWBO.org] Retrieved 14 May 2013</ref> Panelist Andreas Reiner of the [[ICC]] determined the objection, which was published on 25 September 2013.<ref>[http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr/determination Objection Determinations, ICANN.org] Retrieved 05 Nov 2013</ref> He ruled in favor of the objector, which would kill [[Donuts]]' application for the string. The IAU had backed an application by [[Starting Dot]] for the string [[.archi]]. The panelist concluded that the objector represented a substantial and clearly dilineated community, and that the community would be harmed if [[Donuts]] won control of the string.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/14429-first-three-community-objections-decided-dotgay-and-google-win-but-donuts-loses First 3 Community Objections Decided, Domain Incite] Retrieved 05 Nov 2013</ref>
==Application Details==
The TLD will be an open TLD with no restrictions limiting it to a defined group within the architect community or only architects themselves.
The TLD will be an open TLD with no restrictions limiting it to a defined group within the architect community or only architects themselves.
<br>
<br>
"No entity, or group of entities, has exclusive rights to own or register second level names in this TLD. There are superior ways to minimize the potential abuse of second level names, and in this application Donuts will describe and commit to an extensive array of protections against abuse, including protections against the abuse of trademark rights.
"No entity, or group of entities, has exclusive rights to own or register second level names in this TLD. There are superior ways to minimize the potential abuse of second level names, and in this application Donuts will describe and commit to an extensive array of protections against abuse, including protections against the abuse of trademark rights.
We recognize some applicants seek to address harms by constraining access to the registration of second level names. However, we believe attempts to limit abuse by limiting registrant eligibility is unnecessarily restrictive and harms users by denying access to many legitimate registrants. Restrictions on second level domain eligibility would prevent law-abiding individuals and organizations from participating in a space to which they are legitimately connected, and would inhibit the sort of positive innovation we intend to see in this TLD. As detailed throughout this application, we have struck the correct balance between consumer and business safety, and open access to second level names.<ref>[http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/890 Application Details, gTLDresult.ICANN.org]Retrieved 12 Dec 2012</ref>
We recognize some applicants seek to address harms by constraining access to the registration of second level names. However, we believe attempts to limit abuse by limiting registrant eligibility is unnecessarily restrictive and harms users by denying access to many legitimate registrants. Restrictions on second level domain eligibility would prevent law-abiding individuals and organizations from participating in a space to which they are legitimately connected, and would inhibit the sort of positive innovation we intend to see in this TLD. As detailed throughout this application, we have struck the correct balance between consumer and business safety, and open access to second level names."<ref>[http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/890 Application Details, gTLDresult.ICANN.org]Retrieved 12 Dec 2012</ref>
==References==
==References==
[[Category:TLD]]
[[Category:TLD]]
[[Category:Professional New gTLDs|architect]]
[[Category:Professional New gTLDs|architect]]
__NOTOC__