Application Details

Last published on: 7 October 2026 at 15:36 UTC

Application Type: New gTLD

Primary String: god

Application ID: LFGL2683T-T48721

Application Priority Number: --

Application Status: Active

Processing Stage: Pre-Evaluation Processing

Comment Period: --

View:

Summary Responses Clarifying Questions Change Requests Documents Objections

Application Responses

Section: Applying Entity Information

This question set collects information regarding the legal entity that would enter into a Registry Agreement with ICANN upon successful completion of all relevant application processes. The information collected is intended to be used for background screening.

AGB Q1. Full Legal Name

Provide the full legal name of the applying entity as it appears on the official registration documents. Do not use abbreviations.

Link Freedom Group Ltd

AGB Q2. Doing Business As

Provide the name under which the applying entity is doing business, if different from the full legal name answered in Question 1. Such a name must be registered with appropriate local jurisdiction or public authority.

Link Freedom Group / LFG

AGB Q3. Legal Entity Form/Business Structure

Provide the long form (no acronyms) of the legal entity form/business structure of the applying entity as it appears on the official registration documents. If the original script of the legal entity form/business structure is not English, ONLY provide its official English translation. No additional information should be provided as this will be used for the automatic population of the Registry Agreement.

Limited Liability Company

AGB Q4. Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction indicates the location in which the business of the applying entity is registered for legal and financial purposes. This is either 1) a country name, or a 2) state/territory name, depending on where the applying entity is registered. No additional information should be provided as this will be used for the automatic population of the Base Registry Agreement. Examples include "Delaware", "Germany", etc.

Malta

AGB Q10. Website URL

Provide the website URL of the applying entity, if available.

https://f.link/

AGB Q11. Is the applying entity an existing registry operator, ICANN accredited registrar, or an Affiliate of either?

1. Choose Yes or No. 2. Use the definition of Affiliate from the Base Registry Agreement (see https://www.icann.org/en/registry-agreements/base-agreement).

true

AGB Q12. If "Yes", explain.

1. Specify if the applying entity is an existing registry operator, ICANN accredited registrar, and/or an Affiliate of a registry operator and/or registrar. 2. If the applying entity is an Affiliate, provide the details of such Affiliate relationship, including the name of the affiliated registry operator and/or registrar. 3. If the applying entity is an ICANN accredited registrar, specify the registrar ID number.

The applying entity, Link Freedom Group Ltd, is affiliated to Nova Registry Ltd, an existing ICANN Accredited Registry Operator (.LINK).

AGB Q13. Is the applying entity a back-end registry service provider (RSP), an ICANN-approved data escrow agent, an emergency back-end registry operator, a Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) service provider, an ICANN dispute resolution service provider, a Privacy or Proxy Service Provider, or a Reseller?

Choose Yes or No.

false

AGB Q17. Phone Country Code

AGB Q18. Primary Business Phone

Provide the primary business phone number without including the country code.

5619401534

AGB Q19. Primary Business Email Address

Provide the primary business email address of the applying entity.

vaughn@nova.link

AGB Q20. Address Line 1

Enter the street address (no PO Box).

Office 239 Avenue 77 Business Centre, Triq in-Negozju Zone 3

AGB Q21. Address Line 2

Central Business District

AGB Q22. Locality

Enter the city, village, municipality, etc.

Birkirkara

AGB Q23. State/Province/Region

Enter the state, province, department, territory, prefecture, oblast, etc., if applicable.

Birkirkara

AGB Q24. Postal Code

1. Enter the postal code, if applicable. 2. If a postal code does not exist, type “Not Applicable”.

CBD 3010

AGB Q25. Country Code of Location

AGB Q26. Full Legal Name

If applicable, provide the full legal name as it appears on the official registration documents of the Direct Parent Company of the applying entity. Do not use abbreviations.

Vandelay Investments Ltd

AGB Q27. Doing Business As

Provide the name under which the Direct Parent Company is doing business, if different from the full legal name answered in Question 26. Such a name must be registered with appropriate local jurisdiction or public authority.

Vandelay Investments Ltd

AGB Q28. Legal Entity Form/Business Structure

Provide the long form (no acronyms) of the legal entity form/business structure of the Direct Parent Company as it appears on the official registration documents. If the original script of the legal entity form/business structure is not English, ONLY provide its official English translation.

Limited Liability Company

AGB Q29. Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction indicates the location in which the business of the Direct Parent Company is registered for legal and financial purposes. This is either 1) a country name, or a 2) state/territory name, depending on where the Direct Parent Company is registered. Examples include "Delaware", "Germany", etc.

Malta

AGB Q36. Full Legal Name

If applicable, provide the full legal name as it appears on the official registration documents of the Ultimate Parent Company of the applying entity. Do not use abbreviations. "Ultimate Parent Company" means, with respect to an Applicant (and, if applicable, a Direct Parent Company), the top-level entity that directly or indirectly possesses the power to direct the management and policies of such Applicant (and, if applicable, a Direct Parent Company) through the ownership of voting securities, as a general partner, as a managing member, by contract, or otherwise. An Ultimate Parent Company is not controlled by any other entity. If there are no intermediary entities between the Applicant and the Ultimate Parent Company, the Ultimate Parent Company would be the same entity as the Direct Parent Company.

Vandelay Investments Ltd

AGB Q37. Doing Business As

Provide the name under which the Ultimate Parent Company is doing business, if different from the full legal name answered in Question 36. Such a name must be registered with appropriate local jurisdiction or public authority.

Vandelay Investments

AGB Q38. Legal Entity Form/Business Structure

Provide the long form (no acronyms) of the legal entity form/business structure of the Ultimate Parent Company as it appears on the official registration documents. If the original script of the legal entity form/business structure is not English, ONLY provide its official English translation.

Limited Liability Company

AGB Q39. Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction indicates the location in which the business of the Ultimate Parent Company is registered for legal and financial purposes. This is either 1) a country name, or a 2) state/territory name, depending on where the Direct Parent Company is registered. Examples include "Delaware", "Germany", etc.

Malta

Section: Applying Entity Background and Organization

Section: Self-Certification

Section: Operational/Planning

Section: Security Policy and Planning

Section: DNS Abuse

Provide a single document for Self-Certification question AGB Q221, Q5.2-1. The document must include only the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. If the applicant cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements.

AGB Q221. Q5.2-1 - Provide the applying entity’s self-certification document, signed by the CEO, President, CFO and/or equivalent officer of the applying entity. The self-certification document must represent and warrant: SC5.2-1.1 - The applying entity will, no later than delegation of the Top Level Domain (TLD), establish a dedicated abuse point of contact responsible for addressing matters requiring expedited attention and providing a timely response to abuse complaints concerning any name registered in the TLD. SC5.2-1.2 - The applying entity will, no later than delegation of the TLD, establish, publish, and provide to ICANN the location of a mechanism for members of the public to submit reports of abuse in accordance with the current obligations of the Base RA and any Consensus Policies. SC5.2-1.3 - The applying entity has developed proposed measures for removal of orphan glue records for names removed from the zone when provided with evidence in written form that the glue is present in connection with malicious conduct (see Specification 6). SC5.2-1.4 - The applying entity has or will have at time of delegation, established policies for handling complaints regarding abuse. Such policies are to be maintained and posted publicly so that anyone can review the policies via the Internet and any other means deemed appropriate by the applying entity. The applying entity’s policies at a minimum should contain appropriate confirmation of the receipt of the abuse report, the process of review of the report, and actions that will be taken if the applying entity confirms the report is legitimate. SC5.2-1.5 - The applying entity understands that DNS Abuse is Phishing, Malware, Botnets, Pharming and Spam (when used to deliver other forms of DNS Abuse). The applying entity understands and is prepared to contribute to the mitigation or disruption of DNS Abuse in domains in the TLD zone. SC5.2-1.6 - The applying entity’s abuse response capabilities are resourced appropriately to ensure a timely and adequate investigation and response to reports of DNS Abuse. This includes capabilities to receive and evaluate evidence of DNS Abuse in reports, and to take action to stop or disrupt the DNS Abuse. SC5.2-1.7 - The applying entity is prepared to conduct periodic scans of its zone to identify if domains are being used to perpetrate DNS Abuse, and to maintain statistical reports of the scans, the findings, and actions taken.

1. Provide a single document for Self-Certification question Q5.2-1. 2. The document must include only the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements. 3. Do not modify any of the Self-Certification statements. 4. If the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements, provide a document that explains why the applying entity cannot Self-Certify the SC5.2-1.1 through SC5.2-1.7 statements.

Has Documents

Section: Primary String

This question set collects basic information regarding the string that is being applied for (for example, a-label, meaning, script). If the applying entity opts to designate a replacement string, it must answer the same set of questions for the replacement string from the AGB Question Set 5 on.

AGB Q116. Applied-for Primary String (ASCII Label)

god

AGB Q118. What is the meaning/definition of the applied-for gTLD string?

Provide the meaning, or restatement of the string in English, that is, a description of the literal meaning of the string in the opinion of the applying entity. If there is no literal meaning in English (for example, a brand name or a proper noun without a translation) simply state "No English Translation"

A secular, metaphorical, cultural, or colloquial expression denoting exceptional ability, authority, power, prominence, in a particular context, including uses in technology, gaming, entertainment, sport, popular culture, and branding.

AGB Q120. Phonetic Representation

Provide a representation of the string according to the International Phonetic Alphabet.

/ɡɑːd/

AGB Q121. As per Section 3(d) of Specification 11 of the Base Registry Agreement, a registry operator of a “generic string” may not impose eligibility criteria for registering names in the TLD that limit registrations exclusively to a single person or entity and/or that person’s or entity’s “Affiliates” (as defined in Section 2.9(c) of the Registry Agreement). “Generic String” means a string consisting of a word or term that denominates or describes a general class of goods, services, groups, organizations or things, as opposed to distinguishing a specific brand of goods, services, groups, organizations or things from those of others. Confirm that the applied-for string is not a “generic string” in which the applying entity intends to limit registrations exclusively to a single person or entity.

Confirm the statement using a checkbox.

true

AGB Q133. What is the mission and purpose of the applied-for gTLD?

1. Describe the mission and purpose of the applied-for gTLD, including the intended registrants and users, and the related activities that have been or will be carried out to achieve this purpose. 1a. If applying for a variant of an existing gTLD, please also describe the mission and purpose of the existing gTLD, including the intended registrants and users, and the related activities that have been or will be carried out to achieve this purpose. 2. Explain how this purpose is sustainable over time.

Link Freedom Group ("LFG") seeks to operate .GOD as a distinctive, trusted, and responsibly governed general-purpose gTLD designed primarily for secular, expressive, commercial, creative, and community uses of the word "god" as a colloquial signifier of exceptional skill, mastery, excellence, prominence, influence, or achievement. The intended registrants of .GOD include individuals, creators, businesses, organizations, and online communities seeking memorable domain names for lawful activities in areas such as technology, gaming, entertainment, sports, design, media, popular culture, and branding. Illustrative uses could include domain names identifying a person, organization, product, service, community, or resource associated with recognized expertise or excellence in a particular field. LFG recognizes that the word "god" also carries profound religious, spiritual, and cultural meaning for individuals and communities throughout the world. .GOD is not intended to represent, authenticate, endorse, or confer authority upon any religion, faith, deity, religious institution, or system of belief. Nor is LFG seeking to operate .GOD as the namespace of any particular religious community. LFG intends to administer the TLD in a manner consistent with applicable law, ICANN requirements, and registry policies designed to deter deception, impersonation, harassment, and other forms of abuse. The mission of .GOD is to expand choice and competition within the Domain Name System by creating a differentiated namespace combining memorable registrations with responsible registry governance. LFG also intends to use .GOD as an environment in which it can develop, test, and refine registry-level operational, security, identity-verification, abuse-mitigation, and trust-and-safety practices that, where successful and appropriate, may subsequently be applied across other LFG-operated TLDs. Because of the distinctive semantic characteristics of the .GOD string, LFG anticipates adopting enhanced governance measures beyond baseline registry requirements. Subject to final policy design and applicable ICANN requirements, these measures may include enhanced registrant verification for designated higher-risk registrations; defined review or activation procedures where registrations present an elevated risk of impersonation, deception, or abuse; reservation or protected-treatment mechanisms for names presenting heightened religious or public-interest sensitivities; and an administrative process through which alleged misuse of the namespace can be reviewed and addressed promptly and consistently. LFG intends to support the long-term sustainability of .GOD through a diversified registrant base, broad registrar distribution, proportionate pricing, measured namespace growth, active abuse mitigation, and periodic review of its registration and governance policies based upon operational experience and stakeholder feedback. LFG's objective is to develop .GOD as a durable namespace whose long-term commercial success is supported by legitimate use, responsible administration, end-user trust, and continued innovation at the registry level.

Section: Safeguard Identification

This question set collects information related to determining whether certain Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) are required for the applied-for gTLD string. See Section 7.8.2.3 Safeguard PICs. Answers to these questions will inform assessment by ICANN on whether and which Safeguard PICs must be incorporated in the applicable Registry Agreement (RA) if the string proceeds to delegation. The answers themselves will not automatically make such a determination.

AGB Q164. Will people see a domain name as more trustworthy because it is registered in your TLD? Think about how people around the world will understand the TLD string(s) in the application, including literal and informal meanings in different languages and regions.

1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. 2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.

AGB Q165. Is it likely that consumers will face significant risks if domain names in the TLD(s) in the application are abused? Think about how people around the world will understand the TLD string(s) in the application, including literal and informal meanings in different languages and regions.

AGB Q166. Would people generally think that this TLD will be used by entities that require strict licensing or accreditation to do business? Think about how the TLD string(s) in the application will be understood around the world, including both literal and informal meanings in different languages and regions.

AGB Q167. Would most people think that (domains in) the TLD(s) in the application are used for activities that require regular government reporting, inspections, and oversight in various countries? Think about how the TLD string(s) in the application will be understood around the world, including both literal and informal meanings in different languages and regions.

AGB Q168. Could people reasonably believe that (domains in) your TLD will cause or lead to harassment, harm, aggression, complaints, criticism, distress, or embarrassment? Think about how the TLD string(s) in the application will be understood globally, including different languages and cultures.

1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. I-2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.

Yes

AGB Q169. Would most people think that the TLD is used for something usually done by governments? Think about how the TLD string(s) in the application will be understood globally, including different languages and cultures.

1. When answering the questions, apply criteria by considering the meaning of the requested TLD string in the following contexts: a. Literally as described in the application b. Literally in any other language in which the string is a recognized word or phrase. c. Informally in any language or regional variant, where alternative meanings exist. I-2. If the proverbial “reasonable person” who understands the relevant context believes that the question should be answered ‘yes’, then the answer is yes.

AGB Q170. Are you proposing to include one or more of the Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) in the Registry Agreement (RA) voluntarily regardless of ICANN’s Safeguard Assessment outcomes?

Select Yes or No. Notes: 1. ICANN will evaluate whether an applied-for gTLD string requires one or more Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) to be included in the Base RA). 2. In addition to the Mandatory Public Interest Commitments (PICs) that must be included in each Base RA, a subset of Base RAs must include Safeguard PICs based on ICANN’s Safeguard Assessment. See Section 7.8.2.3 Safeguard PICs. 3. Applying entities for TLDs that are not found to require Safeguard PICs can elect to add them to the applicable Base RAs voluntarily to, for example, further their business objectives, help address issues or concerns that are raised or could be raised with respect to their applications, or avoid the need for the evaluation and implementation of customized Registry Voluntary Commitment (RVC). See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs).

Yes

AGB Q171. If Yes, which Safeguard PIC(s) are you proposing to include in the RA?

Choose the applicable Safeguard PICs from the provided list (more than one option can be selected).

• Registry Operators will develop and publish registration policies to minimize the risk of cyber bullying and/or harassment.

Section: Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs)

This question set collects information related to any Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) that the applying entity is submitting. The decision to submit an RVC is typically voluntary, except for those recognized by ICANN to resolve an objection or to address GAC Consensus Advice. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments for more information.

AGB Q172. Are you proposing to include one or more Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) in the Registry Agreement (RA) that are unique to your applied-for string?

1. Select Yes or No. 2. In addition to Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (PICs), an applying entity will be permitted to propose one or more Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) to provide additional safeguards with regard to the registry operator’s operation of an applied-for gTLD string. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs). 3. RVCs are separate from Community Registration Policies. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs) and Section 7.8.4 Community Registration Policies for more information. If you are applying for a Community gTLD, please submit the Community Registration Policies by answering Questions 150-155. However, if you propose to include additional Registry Voluntary Commitments in the RA beyond the Community Registration Policies, you may answer "yes" and proceed to answer the following questions. 4. You are encouraged to consider whether there are other means, separate from including commitment(s) in the Base RA, that could be used to further your business objectives or help resolve any anticipated or actual issue(s) raised regarding the applied-for gTLD string or application. See Section 7.8.3 Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs). Notes: If you select “yes” to this question, you are required to pay the conditional Registry Commitments Evaluation fee, and commitments that are approved by ICANN will be included in Specification 11 of the applicable Base RA as specific voluntary public interest commitments as contractual obligations.

Yes

AGB Q173.1. State a specific Registry Voluntary Commitment (RVC) that is proposed to be included in the applicable Base RA.

1. Draft the Registry Voluntary Commitment (RVC) as proposed contract language. Policies that are approved by ICANN will be included in Specification 11 of the applicable Registry Agreement and will be subject to enforcement by ICANN Contractual Compliance. See Appendix 4 Base Registry Agreement, Specification 11, Section 2 for drafting approach. Consider the usage of defined terms and the definitions of such terms in the 2026 Round Base RA. 2. Enter a single proposed RVC in each response field. Up to 10 RVCs can be submitted. 3. Follow this format to propose what the Registry Operator must do and/or must not do: a) “Registry Operator shall___”; and/or b) “Registry Operator shall not___”. 3. Follow this format to propose any specific requirement(s) that the Registry Operator commits to include in its Registry-Registrar Agreement for registrars: a) ""Registry Operator will include the following provisions in its Registry-Registrar Agreement: Registrar shall___”; and/or b) ""Registry Operator will include the following provisions in its Registry-Registrar Agreement: Registrar shall not___”. 4. Follow this format to propose any specific requirement(s) that the Registry Operator commits to require registrars to include in the applicable Registration Agreements: a) ""Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry- Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision requiring___""; and/or b) ""Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry- Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision prohibiting___"". 5. Include any objective measures that can be applied to demonstrate the Registry Operator’s compliance with the Registry Voluntary Commitment. For example: a) Registry Operator shall develop and implement a Registry Voluntary Commitment and publish this commitment on its website no later than the date on which the TLD is delegated in the DNS. b) Registry Operator shall review the commitment described in (a) at least once per year, and publish the results of such review (including any updates to the registration policy) on its website within thirty (30) days following the anniversary of the Effective Date. 6. If the Registry Voluntary Commitment is limited in time, duration, scope, or any other factors, specify the applicable limitations. For example, if a commitment is time-limited, the applying entity must state if the commitment will apply for the lifetime of the gTLD, only during a specified period, or for some other defined period (such as, Registry Operator shall, for a period of x days from the Effective Date, ___). 7. See Section 7.8.3.3 Registry Commitments Evaluation Criteria for evaluation criteria that ICANN will apply for evaluating each proposed RVC.

<BEGIN RVC-1 TEXT> Reserved Names List 1. Registry Operator shall establish and maintain a Reserved Names List consisting of identified second-level domain name labels and shall cause each domain name label included on the Reserved Names List to be unavailable for registration in the .GOD TLD for so long as such label remains included on the Reserved Names List. <BEGIN RVC-1 TEXT> LFG does not anticipate the need to inlcude any special provisions in the Registry Registrar Agreement or Registrar's Registrant Agreement. For objective criteria by which this RVC-1 can be measured see RVC-4

AGB Q173.2. If there is an additional proposed RVC, state the specific RVC that is proposed to be included in the applicable Base RA.

Please see full instructions in AGB Q173.1.

<BEGIN RVC-2 TEXT> Advanced Notice Before Release of Reserved Names 1. Registry Operator shall provide public notice on the .GOD Registry website not less than [90] calendar days before making any second-level domain name label included on the Reserved Names List available for registration. <END RVC-2 TEXT> LFG does not anticipate the need to inlcude any special provisions in the Registry Registrar Agreement or Registrar's Registrant Agreement. For objective criteria by which this RVC-2 can be measured see RVC-4

AGB Q173.3. If there is an additional proposed RVC, state the specific RVC that is proposed to be included in the applicable Base RA.

Please see full instructions in AGB Q173.1.

<BEGIN RVC-3 TEXT> TLD Dispute Resolution Policy 1.Registry Operator shall establish, maintain and publish a TLD Dispute Resolution Policy through which third parties can file a complaint against Registrants alleging noncompliance with the Registry Operator’s published registration policies, terms of service, and acknowledging Registry Operator’s authority to implement any registry-level remedy resulting from a final determination under the TLD Dispute Resolution Policy, subject to applicable law. 2. Registry Operator shall include the following provisions in its Registry-Registrar Agreement: Registrar shall adhere to all TLD applicable policies, terms of services, including the Dispute Resolution Policy. 3. Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry- Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision requiring Registrants to be bond as a condition of registration all TLD applicable policies, terms of services, including the Dispute Resolution Policy. <END RVC-3 TEXT> Objective Criteria: Registry Operator shall develop and post all TLD-applicable policies, terms of service, including the Dispute Resolution Policy, as part of its TLD Startup plan submitted to ICANN before commercial launch of the TLD.

AGB Q173.4. If there is an additional proposed RVC, state the specific RVC that is proposed to be included in the applicable Base RA.

Please see full instructions in AGB Q173.1.

<BEGIN RVC-4 TEXT> Annual Reserved Names Transparency Report 1. Registry Operator shall, no later than sixty (60) calendar days following each anniversary of the commencement of General Availability, publish on the Registry Operator website an annual transparency report stating: (i) the number of labels then included on the Reserved Names List; (ii) the number of labels added to the Reserved Names List during the preceding year; and (iii) the number of previously reserved labels made available for registration during the preceding year. <END RVC-4 TEXT> LFG does not anticipate the need to inlcude any special provisions in the Registry Registrar Agreement or Registrar's Registrant Agreement. Objective Criteria: Registry Operator proposes to incude this reporting obligation as part of its Annual Registry Code of Conduct certification.

AGB Q173.5. If there is an additional proposed RVC, state the specific RVC that is proposed to be included in the applicable Base RA.

Please see full instructions in AGB Q173.1.

<BEGIN RVC-5 TEXT> 20 Day Registration Waiting Period 1.Registry Operator shall subject every otherwise eligible request to register a second-level domain name to a waiting period of twenty (20) calendar days, measured from the domain's EPP create date as reflected in the Registry database. Registry Operator shall provide a means for these domain name registrations to be publicly accessbile, and shall not allow resolution of the domain name before expiration of that twenty (20) calendar-day period. 2. Registry Operator shall include the following provisions in its Registry-Registrar Agreement: Registrar shall adhere to all TLD applicable policies, terms of services, including the 20 Day Registration Waiting Period. 3. Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry- Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision requiring Registrants to be bond as a condition of registration all TLD applicable policies, terms of services, including the 20 Day Registration Waiting Period. <END RVC-5 TEXT> Objective Criteria: Registry Operator shall develop and post the 20 Day Registration Waiting Period policy and procedure, as part of its TLD Startup plan submitted to ICANN before commercial launch of the TLD.

AGB Q174. Explain the rationale for any limitations to the commitment proposed by the applying entity in Question 173.

1. If you are proposing any limitation to a proposed RVC in Question 173, please provide a rationale in this response field. See Section 7.8.3.3 Registry Commitments Evaluation Criteria. 2. If you are not proposing any limitation to a proposed RVC in Question 173, please type ""Not Applicable"" in this response field.

See corresponding documentation to this question for a more comprehensive analysis of the limitation and rationale of each RVC proposed.

AGB Q175. Why are the commitment(s) being proposed?

1. Provide background information to explain why the commitment is relevant, important, and necessary in support of the gTLD application. See Section 7.8.3.2.1 Applicants Must Identify Purposes for Proposed RVC. 2. Consider whether the proposed commitment could be argued to be duplicative of a requirement under applicable law, ICANN agreements, or ICANN Consensus Policies or Temporary Policies. There may be circumstances in which an RVC that would duplicate requirements under applicable consensus policy or law could be approved at ICANN’s sole discretion, for example, if this type of RVC is necessary to address GAC Consensus Advice. If not duplicative, please explain why you believe the commitment is not duplicative. If yes, please specify such a requirement and explain why you believe duplication in the Base RA is necessary. 3. Consider whether the proposed commitment could be argued to be contrary to a requirement under applicable law, ICANN agreements, or ICANN Consensus Policies or Temporary Policies. ICANN will not approve any commitments that are found to be contrary to applicable laws, ICANN agreements and policies. Please share your views on this issue in the answer to this question. 4. Consider whether the proposed commitment could be argued to be incompatible with ICANN’s Bylaws. ICANN will not approve any commitments that are found to be incompatible with the ICANN Bylaws. See background at the ICANN Board resolution 2024.06.08.08-2024.06.08.10. Please share your views on this issue in the answer to this question. 5. Consider whether the proposed commitment requires the operation of an additional Registry Service. The applying entity shall engage its selected RSP to discuss the implementation of such an additional Registry Service, which must be evaluated through the RSP Program and approved by ICANN. 6. For further guidance on the aforementioned considerations, please see Section 7.8.3.3 Registry Commitments Evaluation Criteria 7. [If the commitment is being proposed as an Application Change Request]: If the commitment is being proposed in response to an objection, GAC Member Early Warning, GAC Advice, or application comment, please provide a reference to the item to which the commitment responds

See corresponding documentation to this question for a more comprehensive analysis of the purpose, necessity, and compatibility of each RVC proposed

Has Documents

Section: Brand & Code of Conduct Exemptions

Section: Additional Information and Supporting Materials

This question set collects any additional information that the applying entity would like to provide, including any supporting materials.

AGB Q222. If the applying entity wishes to provide any additional information or supporting materials that the applying entity believes may be of interest to the public or relevant to the application, please include them here.

1. An applying entity may use this response field to submit any additional, optional information or documentation that the applying entity believes enhances understanding of its application or may be of interest to the general public. This could include, but is not limited to, the applying entity’s: a) Individual registry policies; b) Separate agreement with a third-party to fulfill certain commitments; c) Terms of use; d) Additional Community Registration Policies not intended for RA inclusion; e) Other materials that clarify the applying entity’s mission, values, or intended use of the gTLD. Notes: 1. This question is optional and for informational purposes only. 2. The information provided here will not be evaluated as part of the application, or be contractually binding on the applying entity. 3. All submissions to this question will be posted for the public to review and comment.

LFG intends to implement Registrant verification as part of the TLD’s Terms of Service to ensure a secure, trusted and responsible namespace. LFG anticipates a risk-based, technology-neutral approach capable of accommodating reliable verification methods available in different jurisdictions. Methods may include government-issued identification or authoritative records, qualified third-party identity verification services, and digitally signed or cryptographically verifiable identity credentials. As part of its due diligence, LFG reviewed ICANN Registry Services Evaluation Policy (RSEP) requests involving registrant authentication and verification. fTLD Registry Services’ approved Dynamic Registration Verification request for .BANK and .INSURANCE provides an example incorporating pre-verification, ongoing re-verification and registry audit capabilities. LFG also reviewed Amazon Registry Services’ approved Registration Authentication and Customer Discovery Tool. These precedents demonstrate approaches for integrating registrant verification into registry operations while preserving the Registrar channel. As a European-based Registry Operator, LFG also recognizes the continuing development of trusted digital identity frameworks. Regulation (EU) 2024/1183, commonly referred to as eIDAS 2.0, establishes the European Digital Identity framework and European Digital Identity Wallet ecosystem, through which individuals and organizations can identify themselves and present trusted identity attributes to public and private relying parties. Interoperable digital identity wallets and verifiable electronic attestations may become useful mechanisms for future domain-name registrant verification. Based on this precedent LFG believes that a RSEP is the more optimal path forward towards implementing Registrant Verification as opposed to a PICs or RVC. Similarly, ISO/IEC 18013-5 establishes specifications for mobile driving licences (mDLs), including mechanisms enabling a verifier to obtain credential data, bind the credential to its holder, authenticate its origin and verify its integrity. Standards-based credentials may provide privacy-preserving alternatives to collecting and retaining copies of physical identity documents. LFG therefore intends to design its Registrant verification program to remain adaptable as trusted digital identity ecosystems mature. The objective is not to mandate a single technology or credential worldwide, but to establish a robust framework capable of accepting reliable, interoperable and appropriately secure methods of establishing registrant identity. Implementation will take account of applicable privacy and data-protection requirements, including data minimization and security, and will seek where practicable to verify necessary attributes without retaining unnecessary identity documentation. Final procedures and accepted credential types will be developed prior to launch. Registry Operator will engage its selected service providers and follow any applicable ICANN or RSP evaluation and approval processes required for implementation.

Application Details

Application Responses

Section: Applying Entity Information

Section: Applying Entity Background and Organization

Section: Self-Certification

Section: Operational/Planning

Section: Security Policy and Planning

Section: DNS Abuse

Section: Primary String

Section: Safeguard Identification

Section: Registry Voluntary Commitments (RVCs)

Section: Brand & Code of Conduct Exemptions

Section: Additional Information and Supporting Materials

Section: Bona Fide Intent and Prohibited Communications