To all parties registering JP domain names and other related parties:

July 19, 2000
Japan Network Information Center

The Establishment of the "JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (JP-DRP) and the "Rules for the JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy", and the revision of "Rules regarding domain nameregistration, etc."

We would like to extend our wishes for the continued prosperity of everyone involved. We would also like to thank you for the cooperation and understanding you have provided in the past and which you are continuing to provide the Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) Foundation.

JPNIC has studied the "JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (JP-DRP)" and the "Rules for the JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy".

Here we have laid down final documents, and established the new policy and rules, based on the public comments received earlier.

With regard to the individual points, in this "new establishment of the policyand the report", please refer to the DRP-TF Task Force Report (regarding the final draft) below.

In conjunction with the establishment, the "Rules regarding the registration of domain names" will be changed to the "Rules regarding the organizational type/ geographical type domain name registration" and will be made public.

The outline of the details and grounds of revision is provided below.

The new rules will be enforced on October 19, 2000.

In conjunction with the revision, forms related to the transfer of domain names will be added. Details of the forms will be informed to you separately.

• JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (JP-DRP)
  http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/regist/dom/doc/forthcoming/jp-drp-policy.html (Japanese Only)
• Rules for procedures regarding the JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (JP-DRP)
  http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/regist/dom/doc/forthcoming/jp-drp-rule.html (Japanese Only)
• DRP-TF Task Force Report (regarding the final draft)
  http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/regist/dom/drp/jp-drp/final-tf-report.html (Japanese Only)
• Rules regarding the organizational type / geographical type domain name registration"(revised rules regarding the registration of domain names.)
  http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/regist/dom/doc/forthcoming/rule.html (Japanese Only)

---

July 19, 2000
Japan Network Information Center

Outline of revisions to the rules regarding domain name registration

This document provides an outline of the revisions to the "Rules regarding the registration of domain names"; hereinafter referred to as the "Registration Rules" that will be made public today.

1. Purpose of revision of the Registration Rules

The initial revision of Registration Rules made public on December 1, 1997.

The Registration Rules has revised several times. On September 1, 1998 the rules were revised for reflecting the new establishment of the "ED" domain name, for adding the organization types which are eligible for register geographical type domain name, and for adding the rules to govern the transfer of the domain names registered as network services. On January 1, 1999, additional revision were made to add the accompanying application documents to be submitted when public education center or public education network submit the application form to register, change, and abolish the domain name, and to modify the data related to registered domain name.

The points related to this revision are as follows.

1. Revisions to the "JP Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (JP-DRP)" (referred to below as the "Resolution Policy" ) that was made public today.
2. Revisions concerning deregulation of rules regarding the transfer of JP domain names in conjunction with the implementation of the "Resolution Policy".
3. Revisions accompanying the reconsideration of the system for cancelling the registered domain names.

A summary of the rationale underlying the revisions as well as the main pointsregarding the "Registration Rules" is given below.

2. Revisions accompanying making the "Resolution Policy" public

2.1 The introduction of status "freezed name server" to the domain registration system

The method that is being made public at this time in order to resolve the dispute over domain names on which the "Resolution Policy" is based on, specifies both the cancellation of domain names as well as their transfer; and how these two methods shall be implemented will be specified in the "Registration Rules".

Among these two resolution methods, the method regarding the cancellation of names could be covered through the revision of the current articles in the rules related to reasons for cancellation, however, in the case of the method regarding transfers; the following points had to be considered.

1. In the case where the party applying for dispute resolution already has a registered JP domain name; whether or not the transfer of registration should be allowed (conflict with the principle of having a single domain name for a single organization).
2. For example, in the case where the party applying for dispute resolution has not registered as a register of companies in Japan, etc. and does not possess the registration qualification to receive a transfer of a JP domain name, whether the transfer registration should be approved or not (conflicts between registration qualifications / organizational classification)
3. In the event transfer of registration is to be allowed in these cases, the question of in what manner the normal domain name registration and the transferof registration under the Resolution Policy be balanced arises (problem of balancing it with the usual registrant).

As a result, in order to achieve coordination with the Resolution Policy and to solve these problems of conflict, a system where domain names can be registered with the "freeze name server" has introduced in this revision.

The status "freezed name server" is "the status ready to be configured to the name server but freezed due to lack of condition". It will occur in the following transfer decisions stemming from Resolution Policy.

1. In the case where the party applying for dispute resolution already has a registered JP domain name.
2. In the case where the party applying for dispute resolution does not possess registration qualification (for example, when an organization does not possess registration as a register of companies yet the CO domain name transfer is to be received, or when a Japanese corporation receives an OR domain name transfer).

In these cases, the organization receiving transfer registration may not use a name server setting until the obstacles stated above have been resolved.
However, even under the status "freezed name server" the domain name registration exists, therefore it may be abolished or transferred.

2.2 Restrictions on domain name changes / transfers / abolishment of the domain name at the start of dispute resolution

When dispute resolution has been started under the Resolution Policy, the dispute shall be settled as quickly and as smoothly as possible under the terms stated in the Resolution Policy.

Regarding this point, under the Resolution Policy the transfer of the domain name shall be controlled during the period of resolution of the dispute and the settlement of the party involved in the dispute shall be requested.

However, under the current Registration Rules, from the start of the dispute resolution procedure, there is still the possibility that the party registering the domain name in dispute may change the name or abolish it, and in this case even if the transfer decision is made, the possibility that the applicant may register and use that domain name for a 6-month period remains.

In the revised version of the domain name Registration Rules, this type of condition will be prevented before it occurs; and in order to ensure the smooth implementation of the Resolution Policy, specific limitations on changes, transfer or abolition to the domain name by the party registering the domain name under dispute (the party being proceed with the dispute resolution procedures) after the dispute resolution procedures have been established.

3. Freeing up of rules for domain transfers

3.1 Background

Under the existing Registration Rules transfers of domain names are prohibited in principle. This is to prevent the registration and usage of domain names for inappropriate purposes, to effectively make use of the JP domain name resource, and to promote fair usage.

In actuality, the recognition of the transfer of domain names in the past was limited to exceptional cases of transfers in conjunction with mergers/transfersof business and between subsidiary companies.

However, among the actual petitions for transfer of domain names, even when these conditions were not met, there were cases where the necessity of domain name transfer was recognized and, at the same time, no adverse effects from permitting the transfer could be surmised.

Under these situations, the dispute resolution procedure introduced this time has provided an after the fact solution strategy for dealing with the registration or use of domain in bad faith, and may be said to have greatly changed the limitations on domain name transfers that had been in effect under the existing Registration Rules.

In light of these situations, this revision liberalizes the transfer of domainnames in principle.

3.2 Provision of rules in conjunction with the deregulation

In conjunction with the liberalization of the transfer of domain names in principle, related rules have been provided in this revision. The major points are as listed below.

1. Clarification of the cases in which the domain name transfer will not be recognized have been clarified.
2. Rules for the "freezed name server" exception have been provided.
3. In consideration of the expected increases in applications for transfers and administrative processin costs, fees for domain name transfer applications have been set.
4. Rules for the necessary procedures, documents. for transfer applications have been provided.

4. Reconsideration of the system for cancelling domain names

4.1 Background

The role that the domain name cancellation system plays in ensuring transparency and fairness in domain name registration is a major one.

Since the Registration Rules were made public in 1997, the Board at this Center has made the decision to begin proceedings on the cancellation in one case according to a Secretariat report, and there are a few cases where the Secretariat has examined reports regarding cancellation, however, in actuality, there is not even a single case where a decision to cancel a domain name has been handeddown.

However, in light of the experience of approximately 3 years of operation the following conditions have become apparent.

1. The majority of the cases in which cancellations were consulted applied to lacks of the qualifications for registration.
2. It is possible to use publicly available documents such as company registrations to fairly recognize the lack of qualifications for registration.
3. In the cases of (1) and (2) above, under the cancellation procedures set forth in the present Registration Rules, there is a lack of speed, as well as the possibility of increasing burden placed upon the party registering stemming from this.

4.2 The introduction of a cancellation system dependent upon the Secretariat

In the light of this background, this revision adopts the system that the secretariat may decide the domain name cancellation when the lack of qualifications for registration were to be proven by official statement. For instance in the case where a company registration does not match the corresponding entry in the registration ledger.

In addition, from the standpoints of justice and fairness, an applicable procedure for petitioning the Secretariat's decision has been stipulated. (The cases the Secretariat can cancel the domain name approved by Board of Trustee will be made public separately).

It is expected that the introduction of this system will result in the offering of fairer, more appropriate and expedient procedures.

A time period for petitioning the Secretariat's decision has been established in this revision.

5. Related Rules / Provision of documents

In conjunction with this revision of the Registration Rules, revisions to accompanying / related rules and documents are also necessary. These rules / documents will be made public in succession gradually after this work has been completed.

6. Conclusion

This revision has been prepared in answer to various domestic and overseas requests with regard to domain names and we are aware that we should make continuous effort to meet similar requests.

This time, although the change has been made from the " Rules regarding Domain Name registration." to the "Rules regarding the organizational type / geographical type domain name registration" in the Registration Rules terminology amidstvarious requests, we are aware that there are also requests for the establishment of domain names under a new system.

We will continue to respond to societal requests while working towards achieving a just, fair, and transparent JP domain name system and we ask your support in this endeavor.