<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Expressions of Interest for New TLDs Still a Long Wait</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:15:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Trademark Group Hijacks New TLD Comments - The Domain Industry's News Source</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-540106</link>
		<dc:creator>Domain Name Wire &#187; News &#187; Trademark Group Hijacks New TLD Comments - The Domain Industry's News Source</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-540106</guid>
		<description>[...] comment period on its Draft Expressions of Interest/Pre-Registrations Model (EOI), which I&#8217;ve written about [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p>[...] comment period on its Draft Expressions of Interest/Pre-Registrations Model (EOI), which I&#8217;ve written about [...]</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Berryhill</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-531199</link>
		<dc:creator>John Berryhill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:31:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-531199</guid>
		<description>&quot;I am expecting that by September ICANN can have all the results&quot;

...until someone comes along and complains that by opening the EOI in June/July and closing it in September, that everyone is going to be off on holiday.  That&#039;s usually how these things tend to go.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I am expecting that by September ICANN can have all the results&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8230;until someone comes along and complains that by opening the EOI in June/July and closing it in September, that everyone is going to be off on holiday.  That&#8217;s usually how these things tend to go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Allemann</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-531033</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Allemann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-531033</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a big fan of prediction markets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a big fan of prediction markets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Berryhill</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-531032</link>
		<dc:creator>John Berryhill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-531032</guid>
		<description>Indeed it does:

&quot;The fact that gTLDs can be “transferred” after delegation generates much the same result ‐‐ the EOI process could shift these scenarios to an earlier stage. It is possible that such transfers may be beneficial and in the public interest.&quot;

It almost seems that a more accurate result for data desired by the EOI process could be obtained from running a prediction market.  In that situation, participants would speculate on the outcome of the gTLD application process, instead of taking speculative positions in the process itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed it does:</p>
<p>&#8220;The fact that gTLDs can be “transferred” after delegation generates much the same result ‐‐ the EOI process could shift these scenarios to an earlier stage. It is possible that such transfers may be beneficial and in the public interest.&#8221;</p>
<p>It almost seems that a more accurate result for data desired by the EOI process could be obtained from running a prediction market.  In that situation, participants would speculate on the outcome of the gTLD application process, instead of taking speculative positions in the process itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Constantine Roussos</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-531028</link>
		<dc:creator>Constantine Roussos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-531028</guid>
		<description>I am guessing that there will not be a DAG 4 for Nairobi, Kenya, so an Expressions of Interest will probably commence in July stretching out until August/September. ICANN can begin the communication process after the Kenya meeting which can stretch out to the end of the approximate EOI July/August window. If this is done right, there will probably be a 6-month total communication window (February/March - July/August). The results should be ready for ICANN by September, 2010.

In regards to the overarching issues of Vertical Integration &amp; Characters &amp; Trademarks, these can run parallel with the EOI communication period and finalized by the June Brussels meeting. Tahat way the EOI is ready to commence in June/July.

If this is not the timeline, something is seriously wrong (wont be the first time right?).

I am hoping that ICANN does it the way I am describing it. Having a 6+ month communication period is kinda long but it can silence the ones complaining about &quot;insiders&quot;. 

I am expecting that by September ICANN can have all the results and we move forward with the rest of the application details.

As Philip said, it will be ironic if this delays the process even further. I hope I am not wrong about ICANN&#039;s timeline (wont be the first time I am wrong with that).

Hope everyone has a happy holiday and a great new year 2010!

Constantine Roussos
.music
www.music.us
www.myspace.com/musicextension
www.twitter.com/musicextension</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am guessing that there will not be a DAG 4 for Nairobi, Kenya, so an Expressions of Interest will probably commence in July stretching out until August/September. ICANN can begin the communication process after the Kenya meeting which can stretch out to the end of the approximate EOI July/August window. If this is done right, there will probably be a 6-month total communication window (February/March &#8211; July/August). The results should be ready for ICANN by September, 2010.</p>
<p>In regards to the overarching issues of Vertical Integration &amp; Characters &amp; Trademarks, these can run parallel with the EOI communication period and finalized by the June Brussels meeting. Tahat way the EOI is ready to commence in June/July.</p>
<p>If this is not the timeline, something is seriously wrong (wont be the first time right?).</p>
<p>I am hoping that ICANN does it the way I am describing it. Having a 6+ month communication period is kinda long but it can silence the ones complaining about &#8220;insiders&#8221;. </p>
<p>I am expecting that by September ICANN can have all the results and we move forward with the rest of the application details.</p>
<p>As Philip said, it will be ironic if this delays the process even further. I hope I am not wrong about ICANN&#8217;s timeline (wont be the first time I am wrong with that).</p>
<p>Hope everyone has a happy holiday and a great new year 2010!</p>
<p>Constantine Roussos<br />
.music<br />
<a href="http://www.music.us" rel="nofollow">http://www.music.us</a><br />
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/musicextension" rel="nofollow">http://www.myspace.com/musicextension</a><br />
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/musicextension" rel="nofollow">http://www.twitter.com/musicextension</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Allemann</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-530989</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Allemann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:31:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-530989</guid>
		<description>John - yeah, the document addresses that a little bit...says its OK to have a secondary market if I read it correctly</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John &#8211; yeah, the document addresses that a little bit&#8230;says its OK to have a secondary market if I read it correctly</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Berryhill</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/21/expressions-of-interest-for-new-tlds-still-a-long-wait/comment-page-1/#comment-530988</link>
		<dc:creator>John Berryhill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=9760#comment-530988</guid>
		<description>&quot;Obviously root scaling doesn’t need to be determined in advance, since that’s part of the reason for the EOI process.&quot;

...but if root scaling depends on the number of EOI&#039;s submitted, then how are EOI applicants in any more secure a position regarding their exclusive license to submit a gTLD application, if the point was to &quot;lock in&quot; a guarantee they&#039;d be able to apply for a TLD?

I&#039;m thinking at this point that if the &quot;right to apply for a TLD&quot; is going to open and close for a limited time prior to DAGv4, then it might be worthwhile to form an entity for the purpose of submitting an EOI, and then try to sell that entity off in the time between the end of the EOI and the start of applications.

There&#039;s an interesting speculative opportunity in this thing...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Obviously root scaling doesn’t need to be determined in advance, since that’s part of the reason for the EOI process.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8230;but if root scaling depends on the number of EOI&#8217;s submitted, then how are EOI applicants in any more secure a position regarding their exclusive license to submit a gTLD application, if the point was to &#8220;lock in&#8221; a guarantee they&#8217;d be able to apply for a TLD?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m thinking at this point that if the &#8220;right to apply for a TLD&#8221; is going to open and close for a limited time prior to DAGv4, then it might be worthwhile to form an entity for the purpose of submitting an EOI, and then try to sell that entity off in the time between the end of the EOI and the start of applications.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s an interesting speculative opportunity in this thing&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

