An applicant may propose an RVC when existing policies, rules, or safeguards do not fully address a concern related to a specific gTLD application. Before doing so, applicants are encouraged to review ICANN's Bylaws, Registry Agreement, Registrar Accreditation Agreement, and other ICANN agreements and policies to determine whether standard, pre-existing safeguards, such as Mandatory Public Interest Commitments (PICs), are already sufficient.
In some cases, an applicant that is not required to implement Safeguard Public Interest Commitments (Safeguard PICs) may voluntarily adopt one or more of them as RVCs to help address concerns regarding its application.
An RVC may be appropriate when, for example:
- Concerns raised through application comments cannot be adequately addressed through existing rules, policies, or safeguards;
- Customized commitments are needed to resolve objections or address Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) concerns (issued via GAC Member Early Warning or GAC Consensus Advice);
- Formalized commitments made to specific stakeholders are required to allow an application to proceed.
Applicants are also encouraged to consider alternative, non-Registry Agreement options for addressing concerns, such as registry policies, terms of use, or private agreements with third parties. These alternatives do not get incorporated into the Registry Agreement and are not enforced by ICANN. Only RVCs that meet all of the Registry Commitments Evaluation criteria may be approved.