Return-path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from mx1.syr.edu [128.230.12.21]
	by gwia202.syr.edu; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:11:43 -0400
Received: from greenriver.icann.org (greenriver.icann.org [192.0.35.121])
	by mx1.syr.edu (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k6VDBbwx002347
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
	for <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:11:41 -0400
Received: from greenriver.icann.org (greenriver [127.0.0.1])
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6VDAHfc019005;
	Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:17 -0700
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id k6VDAG4m019004;
	Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:16 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: greenriver.icann.org: majordomo set sender to [log in to unmask] using -f
Received: from pechora3.icann.org (pechora3.icann.org [192.0.34.38])
	by greenriver.icann.org (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6VDAGCX019001
	for <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:16 -0700
Received: from smtp01.icann.org (smtp01.icann.org [192.0.34.14])
	by pechora3.icann.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k6VDA9jr023677
	for <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:09 -0700
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (nic06-2-82-245-224-136.fbx.proxad.net [82.245.224.136])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by smtp01.icann.org (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6VDA1H9015130
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
	for <[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:08 -0700
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 15:10:03 +0200
From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: liaison6c <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [liaison6c] For information:Proposed .BIZ, .INFO AND .ORG gTLD Registry Agreements
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (pechora3.icann.org [192.0.34.38]); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 06:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: [log in to unmask]
Precedence: bulk
X-Scanner: InterScan AntiVirus for Sendmail
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mx1.syr.edu id k6VDIA4R014424

[To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org]
[To: announce[at]gnso.icann.org;  [log in to unmask]]
[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org]

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-28jul06.htm
Please note that ICANN has posted for public information:
The Proposed .BIZ, .INFO AND .ORG gTLD Registry Agreements

On 27 June 2006, ICANN posted for public information proposed new=20
registry agreements for the operation of each of the .BIZ, .INFO and=20
ORG registries. ICANN staff continued to work with each of the current=20
operators of these registries to finalize these proposed agreements and=20
appendices. On 18 July 2006, the ICANN Board of Directors approved the=20
posting of each of these proposed agreements for public comment. A=20
public comment period will remain open until 5:00 PM PDT/California, 28=20
August 2006. At that time the comments will be submitted to the Board of=20
Directors for the Board to consider at its meeting on 13 September 2006.

BIZ
Agreement
Appendices
Comments can be posted to: [log in to unmask]
Comments can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/biz-tld-agreement
INFO
Agreement
Appendices
Comments can be posted to: [log in to unmask]
Comments can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/info-tld-agreemen=
t
ORG
Agreement
Appendices
Comments can be posted to: [log in to unmask]
Comments can be viewed at: http://forum.icann.org/lists/org-tld-agreement

Key terms for the proposed agreements, and differences from the 2001=20
BIZ and .INFO registry agreements and 2003 .ORG registry agreement,=20
include the following:

Term of New Agreements. The proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry=20
agreements provide for an initial six year term. Each of the proposed=20
BIZ and .INFO agreements would expire, absent renewal, at the end of=20
December 2012, and the proposed .ORG agreement would expire at the end=20
of June 2013, absent renewal.

Presumptive Renewal. The proposed new .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry=20
agreements each provide for presumptive renewal, absent material and=20
repeated breach of the agreement by the registry operator. This is=20
consistent with each of the 2005 .NET registry agreement, and the=20
proposed new .COM registry agreement. With respect to the terms of any=20
subsequent agreement negotiated with the registry operators for the=20
continued operation of the .BIZ. .INFO and .ORG registries, the proposed=20
agreements provide that adaption of renewal terms will be via comparison=20
to the five "most reasonably comparable" gTLDs, as compared to the "five=20
largest gTLDs" language of the 2005 .NET agreement and the proposed new=20
COM agreement.

Lifting of Price Controls on Registry Services. Following extensive=20
consideration and discussion, each of the proposed new .BIZ, .INFO and=20
ORG registry agreements provide for the lifting of price controls=20
formerly imposed on the pricing of registry services. However, in order=20
to protect incumbent domain name registrants and allow time for planning=20
by those in the registry and registrar communities, the form of=20
registry-registrar agreement proposed with each of the new registry=20
agreements requires six months advance notice by the registry operator=20
of any price increase in registry services. This is consistent with the=20
notice period required under the registry-registrar agreement=20
implemented with the 2005 .NET registry agreement, and the=20
registry-registrar agreement included with the proposed new .COM=20
registry agreement.

Fees Payable to ICANN. The proposed new .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry=20
agreements provide for a sliding scale of transactional fees payable to=20
ICANN per annual increment of a domain name, starting with $0.15 in 2007=20
and 2008, $0.20 in 2009 and 2010, and increasing to $0.25 in 2011 and=20
2012* (*the proposed new .ORG registry agreement has a fee schedule=20
implementation date of July 2007, and will continue through June 2013).=20
The per name transaction fees, however, are subject to adjustment=20
depending on the average price of domain name registrations during each=20
calendar quarter throughout the term of the agreement. Each of the=20
proposed new agreements provide only for a transactional fee component=20
payable to ICANN, with no fixed fee. This is a markedly different=20
approach from the fixed fee established in the 2001 .BIZ and .INFO=20
registry agreements, and 2003 .ORG registry agreement, and is intended=20
to appropriately scale the fees payable by each registry to ICANN to the=20
success or decline of the registry business.

Consensus Policy Implementation and Limitations. Each of the 2001 .BIZ=20
and .INFO registry agreements, and the 2003 .ORG registry agreement,=20
required each of the registry operators to comply with and implement=20
established consensus and temporary policies, including as pertained to=20
a list of enumerated topics. This list was updated for the 2005 .NET=20
registry agreement, and the identical list has been incorporated into=20
each of the proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry agreements. In=20
addition, each of the proposed new .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry=20
agreements contains the same set of limitations on the adoption of=20
consensus policies as the proposed new .COM registry agreement. This=20
list of limitations is also identical to those limitations provided for=20
in the 2005 .NET registry agreement, with the exception of the=20
limitation on modification to the procedure for consideration of new=20
registry services being limited to two years after the established=20
effective date of the proposed .BIZ, .COM, .INFO and .ORG registry=20
agreements, which is three years following the effective date of the=20
2005 .NET registry agreement.

Process for Approval of New Registry Services. The same set of=20
procedures, steps, and requirements for the approval of proposed new=20
registry services has been included in the proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG=20
registry agreements as previously seen in the 2005 .NET registry=20
agreement, and the proposed .COM registry agreement.

Data Escrow Provisions. The security and functionality of the registry=20
data escrow has been a significant focus in the new forms of registry=20
agreements negotiated by ICANN since 2005. Accordingly, the requirements=20
for data escrow by each of the registries, as well as the requirements=20
for the relationship between registry operator and data escrow agent,=20
have been expanded and clarified in the proposed new registry agreements.

Other Standardized Terms. Consistent with the proposed new .COM registry=20
agreement, each of the proposed .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry agreements=20
contains a Section 3.1(f) on the use for statistical purposes only of=20
"traffic data." The 2005 .NET registry agreement did not contain this=20
provision, however the inclusion of this provision was negotiated by=20
each of the .BIZ, .INFO and .ORG registry operators to provide for=20
consistency with the proposed new .COM registry agreement, although this=20
does not imply that these registries will implement said provision.

Glen de Saint G=E9ry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org