.osaka Domain Information
Applicant Full Legal Name
Interlink Co., Ltd.
Legal Establishment
Incorporated (Corporation)
Applicant Address
Sunshine 60 Bldg. 37th Fl. 3-1-1 Sunshine 60 Bldg. 37th Fl. 3-1-1
Higashi Ikebukuro
Toshima Tokyo 170-6037
JP
State Jurisdiction
Japan
Applicant Website
http://www.interlink.or.jp/
Applied for gTLD
OSAKA
Mission/Purpose of Domain Extension
Interlink has received the endorsement of the Osaka Prefectural Government for its application to ICANN to operate and manage the ".osaka" top-level domain (TLD). In its proposal to the government authority, Interlink made a sufficiently strong case suggesting that the registry operator for the TLD... Read more
Benefits
ICANN has determined that the opening of the new gTLD program is unified with its mission to increase competition and innovation in the namespace. Interlink proposes that ".osaka" will play a vital role in expanding online communities in Osaka as well as promoting the Osaka brand. One of... Read more
Operational Rules and Cost Benefits
Interlink has constructed a sound financial plan that correlates with marketing and operational plans to reach its goal of running a financially fit operation and ensure profitability within 5 years of operation. Interlink believes having a strong financial plan is key to minimizing social costs.... Read more
Interlink has constructed a sound financial plan that correlates with marketing and operational plans to reach its goal of running a financially fit operation and ensure profitability within 5 years of operation.
Interlink believes having a strong financial plan is key to minimizing social costs. Interlink has committed to putting in place a financial instrument to ensure continued operations for three years in order to better protect its users. Interlink has fully issued a letter of credit that allows for fluctuations in registration volumes that exceed its projections. In addition, Interlink has deposited an equal amount into a separate account to further show its commitment in protecting registrants from a failed registry.
Interlink fully expects to be able to provide customers with top-notch services though its registrars. With the synergy created by working together with its registrar partners Interlink is certain to that ".osaka" will become an innovative domain name space that benefits the Osaka community.
According to the most recent JPRS Registry Report, for 12/31/2010 (last accessed Feb.2011), approximately 9.6% of all organizational/geographic names in the .JP zone originate in Osaka. Furthermore domain name registrants are responsible for 13% of general use ASCII names and 4.8% of IDN names registered in the .JP ccTLD. This is second to only Tokyo. (See http://jprs.co.jp/doc/report/registry-report-2010-e.pdf for the full report).
Based on information gathered by Interlink, the ".osaka" domain market is viable and Interlink as based its financial planning to support the TLD in a conservative matter. Addition details regarding Interlinks market projections and financial planning can be found in response to Questions 45 through 50 of this application.
Protection of Rights
Numerous parties have expressed concerns over the introduction of the new gTLD program with the belief that new TLDs could harm consumer welfare due to consumer confusion. Trademark holders have also brought up the issue of new TLDs imposing additional costs due to the necessity of participating in "defensive" registrations.
Interlink believes these concerns will be sufficiently addressed by its full implementation of ICANN's new Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) and rules for new TLDs. Listed below is each policy that Interlink will implement, followed by a brief description, to minimize social costs:
1. Trademark Clearinghouse
2. Sunrise and Trademark Claims Process
3. Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
4. Uniform Rapid Suspension URS
5. Other Rights Protection Mechanisms
1. Trademark Clearinghouse
The trademark clearinghouse is a mandatory RPM that has been developed in order to serve as a central repository for information to facilitate other RPMs such as the Sunrise Period and Trademark Claims process. Though this RPM is still under development, Interlink's partners, including its back-end registry services provider, Neustar, are actively playing a role on the IAG to ensure that protections afforded by the clearinghouse and associated RPMs are feasible and implementable. Further information regarding the implementation of this mechanism can be found in reference to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms.
2. Sunrise and Trademark Claims Process
The Sunrise Period is a mandatory launch phase that a registry is required to implement for a minimum of 30 days. Interlink's back-end registry service provider, Neustar, has extensive experience in implementing sunrise registration periods, most recently under the .CO TLD.
The Trademark Claims process is tied into both the Trademark Clearinghouse and the Sunrise Period and is also a mandatory RPM that is intended to provide ʺclear noticeʺ to a potential registrant(s) if he/she attempts to secure a domain name that matches a trademark that is registered in the Trademark Clearinghouse. Though only required by ICANN to implement for 60 days during open registrations, Interlink believes that implementing the service over the life of the registry will prove to be an effective tool in reducing the number of bad-faith registrations and other cases of abuse in the ".osaka" TLD. Interlink's back-end provider, Neustar became the first TLD with a Trademark Claims service with the launch of the .BIZ TLD in 2001 and Interlink plans to work closely with Neustar to ensure the service is run smoothly.
The sunrise implementation process is described in more detail above, and in response to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms. More information about the implementation of the Trademark Claims process can be found in answer to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms.
3. Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)
The UDRP is an ICANN Consensus Policy instituted by ICANN in 1998. The UDRP provides trademark holders an alternative method to resolve domain name disputes. Interlink will monitor UDPR decisions regarding domains in the ".osaka" TLD and take the necessary steps to ensure that decisions rendered by ICANN approved service providers, such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), are correctly implemented by its registrars. In the event that the registry is notified by a trademark owner that a registrar failed to implement a decision Interlink will investigate the claim and take action by either notifying the registrar of its obligations or by proactively implementing the decision itself.
4. Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)
During the planning and policy discussion that took place in the past few years regarding the New gTLD Program, trademark owners identified that the UDRP may not be the most cost effective means to protect trademark owners marks when there are hundreds of new TLDs in operation. Furthermore, the majority of UDRP cases were clearly cases of cybersquatting, however, the UDRP did not produce immediate results. The URS is the result of many discussions with rights holders and offers a more cost effective and speedy mechanism for trademark owners to enforce their rights.
The URS requires a greater deal of participation from the registry than the UDRP and Interlink is fully aware of the requirements involved in the URS.
According to the current draft procedures, Interlink will lock the name within 24 hours or receipt of the complaint from the URS provider in order to ensure the name is not transferred or deleted and to restrict all changes to the registration data. The name will continue to resolve as normal at this point.
Once a determination has been made, and the URS provider has received notification of such a decision, Interlink will act accordingly to implement the determination. Therefore, in the event of a decision for the complainant (trademark owner), Interlink will immediately suspend the name in accordance with the policy, which is currently for the balance of the registration period. Additionally, the name will no longer be allowed to resolve to the original website, thus the registry will change the nameservers to redirect to an informational page provided by the URS provider.
Finally, Interlink will take steps to ensure that the WHOIS information appropriately reflects the current status of the domain name. In doing so, Interlink will leave all the original registration data, except for the nameservers, in place, and clearly reflect that the domain name cannot be transferred, deleted, or modified for the remainder of the registration period.
The current draft policy states that there shall be an option for a successful complainant to the extent the registration period for one additional year at commercial rates.
Additional details regarding the implementation of the URS can be found in response to Question 29: Rights Protection Mechanisms
5. Other Rights Protection Mechanisms
Interlink will fully comply with the Trademark Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure (PDDRP) adopted by ICANN as described in the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook and Specification 7 of the Registry Agreement and other rights mechanisms approved and implemented by ICANN.
i. How will multiple applications for a particular domain name be resolved?
Multiple applications for names under the Founders Program will be handled by objectively reviewing the application against the criteria set forth in the RFP. At which time, the Registry shall make a final selection based on how well each applicant fulfilled the evaluation criteria.
Multiple applications for the same domain name in both the Sunrise and Landrush will respectively be resolved by an auction as described in section (iv) related to domain registration policies. The use of an auction to allocate names with multiple legitimate applications will benefit sunrise applicants because they will not have to rush in order to be the first to submit such an application. This also reduces the load to the systems as in past first-come, first-served launches, applicants have been known to place registration requests with several other registrars in order to optimize their chances of being the first in line.
Settling competing applications though an auction mechanism is more desirable than a first-come, first-served method. This is due to a number of factors; for example, sunrise applicants (trademark holders) should not have to rush to submit an application for a domain name. If an applicant is forced to try to be first in line, the applicant is likely to submit a registration request through multiple registrars. This causes a sub-optimal use of energy on behalf of the applicant, and causes unnecessary work on behalf of the registrars and registry. Another important factor in Interlink's decision to settle competing applications through an auction mechanism is due to the assumption that the highest bidder has more desire for the name, therefore, the winning applicant is likely provide more utility to Internet users.
ii. Explain any cost benefits for registrants you intend to implement.
The registry will allow local governments of protected geographic names (both local and international) the ability to register their names during a period of no less than a year. This will ensure that they have first rights to register their names for a minimal cost from an ICANN accredited registrar rather than have to dabble in the speculative markets.
As stated above, the registry will handle competing applications in the Sunrise and Landrush periods by implementing an auction mechanism. The auction mechanism is a fair way to solve the issue of competing applications. A traditional first-come first served mechanism will create more load for registrars as one prospective registrant may choose to place the same application for a domain name through several registrars. Additional issues with the first-come, first-served model in that there may be disputes of which registrar's connection hits the registry first for a certain name.
An auction at the early stages of a registry will benefit registrants by allowing them to purchase the domain name for much less that the cost that they would incur in the domain aftermarket. Furthermore, an auction will allow the users to place a value on the domain name. It can be assumed that the bidder who places the higher bid places a higher value on the domain name, and therefore will be more likely to develop the domain name to be beneficial for Internet users.
iii. Do you intend to make contractual commitments to registrants regarding the magnitude of price escalation?
As stated in draft Registry Agreement in the New gTLD Applicant guidebook, the ".osaka" registry will commit to only adjusting prices based on market conditions and staying consistent with the current inflation rate. The issue of price increases will be adequately reviewed on a biannual basis. Interlink will provide advanced written notice regarding any price adjustments in accordance with the new gTLD Registry Agreement.
Is this a Community-based TLD?
Yes
Community Description Details
Interlink Co., Ltd., is submitting its application for the ".osaka" top-level domain as a Community TLD application for the Osaka Community as required by the Osaka Prefectural Government. Interlink received an endorsement letter from the Osaka Prefectural Government on February 21, 2012 based on... Read more
Applicant Community Relationship
Interlink is enthusiastic about the prospect ".osaka" presents for the Osaka Community and believes that a community structure for the TLD will maximize the benefits to Internet users in the community. Since the announcement of the new gTLD program, Interlink has engaged the Osaka Prefectural... Read more
Community-based Purpose
Interlink is confident that the creation of the ".osaka" namespace will create new and exciting opportunities for the development of new business models and methods for engagement among local online communities such as individual users, businesses, organizations, and government bodies. Interlink... Read more
Domain Extension Community Relationship
The string, ".osaka", directly represents the Osaka community, and has been fully approved by the Osaka Prefectural Government as the proper representation of the Osaka community on the Internet. "Osaka" has no connotation beyond the Osaka geographical are and its related community.
Intended Community-based Registration Policies
In order to maintain a safe, stable, and reliable environment for registrants and users of the Osaka domain space, Interlink proposes the implementation of clearly defined registration and eligibility requirements. In addition, Interlink will also implement a strict Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) to... Read more
Is this a Geographic-based TLD?
Yes
Protection of Geographic Names
Interlink Co., Ltd, (Interlink) will implement strict policy restrictions concerning the registration and use of geographic names under the ".osaka" top-level domain and will work closely with the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and ccTLD managers to ensure that geographic names are... Read more
Other Applicants for .osaka domain
GMO Registry, Inc.
Corporation
GMO Internet, Inc. (Tokyo Stock Exchange 9449)
26-1 Sakuragaoka-cho
Shibuya-ku Tokyo 1508512
JP
The definition of the organizational classification is set based on ʺCompanies Actʺ of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications in Japan
Reference : http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/H17/H17HO086.html
http://gmoregistry.com/
OSAKA