ICANN announced overnight, how will evaluate the requested changes in new gTLD’s applications.
ICANN will consider the 7 criteria below and inform the applicant whether the changes are approved or denied.
As usually all seems to be left to the evaluators to decide.
None of the 7 factors were given any more or less weight than the others, nor did ICANN say how many of factors had to go in the applicant who wishes to change their application for ICANN to allow it.
Decision Criteria
Determination of whether changes will be approved will balance the following factors:
- Explanation – Is a reasonable explanation provided?
- Evidence that original submission was in error – Are there indicia to support an assertion that the change merely corrects an error?
- Other third parties affected – Does the change affect other third parties materially?
- Precedents – Is the change similar to others that have already been approved? Could the change lead others to request similar changes that could affect third parties or result in undesirable effects on the program?
- Fairness to applicants – Would allowing the change be construed as fair to the general community? Would disallowing the change be construed as unfair?
- Materiality – Would the change affect the evaluation score or require re-evaluation of some or all of the application? Would the change affect string contention or community priority consideration?
- Timing – Does the timing interfere with the evaluation process in some way? ICANN reserves the right to require a re-evaluation of the application in the event of a material change. This could involve additional fees or evaluation in a subsequent application round. (AGB §1.2.7.)
Note that per section 1.2.7 of the Applicant Guidebook, if at any time during the evaluation process information previously submitted by an applicant becomes untrue or inaccurate, the applicant must promptly notify ICANN via submission of the appropriate forms.
This includes applicant-specific information such as changes in financial position and changes in ownership or control of the applicant.
- ICANN reserves the right to require a re-evaluation of the application in the event of a material change. This could involve additional fees or evaluation in a subsequent application round.
- Failure to notify ICANN of any change in circumstances that would render any information provided in the application false or misleading may result in denial of the application.
Although the applications cost $185,000 to file and applicants had month to file their application many applicants still had error, probably none more noticeable than DotConnectAfrica Trust which applied for .DotAfrica instead of .Africa (there is another applicant for .Africa)
Sounds logical for once, but there is a preceding law to consider, Murphy’s
So it can’t just be the old – “I changed my mind!” excuse.
That’s good to know.
I find it hard to believe that after paying a phenomenal amount of money to apply, applicants have actually submitted things in error. I believe most of these changes will be due to the constant monitoring of public opinion that the applicants have no doubt been doing.
Well in the case of DotAfrica it was just a mistake but a huge one when you get the string wrong
Thanks Mike- if we have to clarify again, first off, DCA informed ICANN of the situation immediately after the reveal day via the customer service, and second, we also immediately published a PR regarding the matter for teh good of the public, here: http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1110237447043.html
So at least we know DCA cant be accused of public opinion monitoring and should then meet the ‘evidence’ criteria!. One blog did a good analysis of what could have happened, although I would leave the suggested ICANN’s motives too far fetched: http://domainnewsafrica.com/the-curious-case-of-dotafrica-2/