Advertisement

May 25, 2013

ICANN’s Appoints Independent Objector and Gets TLD Application System Back Online

As promised, ICANN reopened the TLD Application System (“TAS”) on May 22, 2012.  Registered users are now able to log in and complete their applications.  ICANN has indicated that the system will remain open until 23:59 GMT/UTC on Wednesday, May 30, 2012.

Now that the system is back online, ICANN has encouraged applicants to review “Top Things Users Should Know When TAS Reopens,” which provides tips for logging in, completing the application process and submitting payment details. In response to customer feedback, ICANN has indicated that it has also improved the overall system’s performance. ICANN has not yet confirmed how and whether the remainder of the rollout timeline will be impacted.  The FAQ page at ICANN”s gTLD website still reflects that ICANN will post the public portions of all applications received, including applied-for strings, applicant names, application type, mission/purpose of proposed gTLD, and other public application data, “[a]pproximately 2 weeks after the application submission period closes.”  So, approximately on Wednesday, June 13th. 

As the gTLD program gets back on track, ICANN also announced earlier this month that it has appointed Professor Alain Pellet to serve as Independent Objector for the gTLD program. Pellet is currently a professor at the University Paris Ouest, Nanterre/La Défense and is a former member and former Chairperson of the International Law Commission of the United Nations. 

In his role as Independent Objector, Professor Pellet, may file a formal objection to any gTLD application on the grounds that it is either not in the public interest or where there is substantial objection to the application in the community.   It is unclear precisely how Pellet will determine whether a particular applied-for gTLD is not in the public interest (presumably, of the global online community) or where there is “substantial objection” to a particular applied for gTLD from a particular community (for example, how many formal objections by members of a particular community are sufficient to be “substantial”?). 

More details about ICANN’s Independent Objector appointment are available here.

©1994-2013 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Jamie is an Associate in the firm’s Boston office, where she practices in the Litigation Section. Her practice encompasses a range of litigation matters, including complex civil litigation, trademark and domain name disputes, and biotechnology and licensing disputes.

Jamie also maintains an active pro bono practice. She has assisted victims of domestic violence with obtaining retraining orders and regularly counsels domestic violence programs on their record retention policies.

(617) 348-1824

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.