“One thing that seems incorrect to me is your assertion that ‘there’s no rush, our TLD has been reserved for when we’re ready’ The TLD has certainly not been reserved, and I’m wondering what gave you that impression.”

A reading of the New TLD Guidebook (http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/guidebook-full-11jan12-en.pdf), will relieve any qualms about New York City’s TLD being available when the city is ready for it. Perhaps I should have used an “in-essence” modifier for my reserved statement, but ICANN’s Guidebook clearly precludes someone snatching the .newyork or .nyc TLD from us.

See the Guidebook section 2.2.1.4 Geographic Names Review (pages 2-16 to 2-18), where it states:

“Applications for gTLD strings must ensure that appropriate consideration is given to the interests of governments or public authorities in geographic names.”

Section 2.2.1.4.2 Geographic Names Requiring Government Support states,

“An application for a city name will be subject to the geographic names requirements (i.e., will require documentation of support or non-objection from the relevant governments or public authorities)”
Further, in section 2.2.1.4.2 Geographic Names Requiring Government Support, sub section 3, the New York name is listed as a reserved name,

“An application for any string that is an exact match of a sub-national place name, such as a county, province, or state, listed in the ISO 3166-2 standard.”

And there are other protections for geographic names.

One could argue I suppose that an entity named something like National Youth Council could apply for .nyc and claim that it’s not associated with the interests of a geographic territory or city or the people of New York. But I suspect the city, ICANN or the GAC (the Government Advisory Council that represents government interests at ICANN, and is the force behind the multitude of rules prohibiting such shenanigans) would readily coalesce and reject such a claim as bogus.

Tom Lowenhaupt

Yea us! Yea S.W.I.M!

Tom

But clarity with regard to city applications, and the proper level of public engagement and support, still requires some weegieing to discern.

“For delegation requests for new generic TLDS (gTLDs), the Contractor shall include documentation to demonstrate how the proposed string has received consensus support from relevant stakeholders and is supported by the global public interest.”

to:

“The contractor shall verify all requests related to the delegation and redelegation of gTLDs are consistent with the procedures developed by ICANN. In making a delegation or redelegation request, the Contractor must provide documentation verifying that ICANN followed its policy framework including specific documentation demonstrating how the process provided the opportunity for input from relevant stakeholders and was supportive of the global public interest.”

There seems to be a watering down from “consensus support from relevant stakeholders” to “opportunity for input from relevant stakeholders”. However, the “documentation verifying that ICANN followed its policy framework” phrase links back to the Guidebook and consensus policy. I suspect this is one of those “full employment for lawyers” policy changes:)

I’m not associated with that venture. I might have provided them with an interview but am in no way associated with the operation.

Tom

Are you involved in the .NYC pre-registration effort via United Domains? The number of pre-registrations is 4,876 at the time of this comment. They are using Connecting.nyc Inc.’s name on their website and they are indicating an estimated Mid-2012 launch date. Here’s the link - https://www.uniteddomains.com/new-top-level-domain/nyc-domain-registration/. Didn’t know this effort was already underway prior to the application submission phase. Looking forward to seeing .NYC!

Best Regards,

Ray

What would really be cool is taking Google’s mapping technology and virtualizing it to create virtual worlds on a social networking platform. If you check out http://www.southland.la/, you’ll see Small Worlds which is available on the Southland.LA social network. Would be nice to have destinations, districts, cities, etc. available to users after they open an account on a Small Worlds type of platform. Users could engage each other in this virtual geo world. Businesses would also be able to engage these users. Imagine what this would be like for .NYC via a social network and virtual geo world.

Best Regards,

Ray

Here’s an update:
http://domainincite.com/centralnic-says-la-business-as-usual/

Best Regards,

Ray

Sounds interesting. You might wasnt to look into this story:
http://domainincite.com/laos-to-reclaim-la-from-los-angeles/

Best,

tom

Thought I’d share with you my latest venture with regards to .LA. I currently own www.cityhall.la, www.metro.la, www.k12.la, www.healthcare.la, and www.pbs.la. I’m in the process of reaching out to the City of Los Angeles to make these domains available to them at no cost. I’ve already created a social networking website on http://www.k12.la/ as a prototype via Ning’s social networking service. Social networking technology can be used with these high value domains for social collaboration purposes. As you can see at K12.LA, there is an opportunity to market clothing, accessories, etc. along with advertising revenues that could be used to raise additional revenues for the school districts. I’ll let you know if this concept materializes.

Ray Marshall

And as I pondered their road I thought about the strength of our democracy. While but a small example, the lack of transparency and public engagement in imagining the potential for our TLD has been an immense personal frustration. Where is our engagement process? Where are the public hearings? Where’s the traditional media?

So, inspired by the Egyptians, I’ll press for exercising our democracy, and as a start, a discussion about the model - Standard or Community?

Tom Lowenhaupt