[Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by previous applicant

Thu Jun 4 17:19:33 UTC 2015

I think we should evaluate the issues independently.  It is entirely
possible the GNSO could have different views than the CWG.  And if there is
GNSO Supermajority, then the Board presumptively must accept our
recommendation, despite whatever the ccTLD-heavy CWG comes back with.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
http://rodenbaugh.com

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Kiran Malancharuvil <
Kiran.Malancharuvil at markmonitor.com> wrote:

> It's definitely an important issue but I echo Lars' call to be sure we
> don't duplicate efforts. Perhaps a placeholder in this charter to
> incorporate the recommendations of the CWG?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kiran
>
> Kiran Malancharuvil
> Policy Counselor
> MarkMonitor
> 415-419-9138 (m)
>
> Sent from my mobile, please excuse any typos.
>
> On Jun 4, 2015, at 9:53 AM, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org<mailto:
> lars.hoffmann at icann.org>> wrote:
>
> Dear Phil,
> Just a quick note that the CWG on the Use of Country and Territory Names
> is dealing with the issue of two-letter top-level domains and it is an
> issue on which the ccNSO participants have clear views. This is not to
> discourage inclusion of this in the Charter, just a call for caution to
> prevent the development of duplicate and potentially contradictory policies
> or policy frameworks (the latter being what the CWG is charted to produce).
> Very best. Lars
>
>
> From: Phil Buckingham <phil at dotadvice.co.uk<mailto:phil at dotadvice.co.uk>>
> Date: Thursday, 4 June 2015 18:25
> To: 'Mike Rodenbaugh' <mike at rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>>,
> 'Donna Austin' <Donna.Austin at ariservices.com<mailto:
> Donna.Austin at ariservices.com>>
> Cc: "<gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>>" <
> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> Hi Donna,
>
> I totally agree with your and Mike’s  comment.
>
> The issues surrounding  re Round 1 applicants  .spa ( as in a spa /
> Belgium city) .london (as in UK and Canada) .patagonia( as in country /
> clothing company) and of course .amazon  need to resolved / clarified prior
> to Round 2 .
>
> I would also include the issue surrounding two letter TLDs – which stopped
> the likes of Hewlett Packard applying for .HP
>
> Thanks
> Phil
>
> Phil Buckingham
> CEO, Dot Advice Limited
>
> From: gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:
> gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:
> gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
> Sent: 04 June 2015 01:55
> To: Donna Austin
> Cc: gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> +1   I think there may be some value in the DG including in the Charter a
> review of the geographic names restrictions in the AGB.  Thanks Donna for
> raising the issue.
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Donna Austin <
> Donna.Austin at ariservices.com<mailto:Donna.Austin at ariservices.com>> wrote:
> Hi Lars
>
> Thank you, I am aware of the work Heather and the CCWG are undertaking,
> but I wasn’t sure if there was overlap into the work of this group.
>
> My concern is that the CCWG is restricting it’s considerations to country
> and territory names at the top level and the AGB had other requirements,
> for example relating to capital cities and continents. Therefore I think
> there may be some value in the DG including in the Charter a review of the
> geographic names or something along those lines.
>
> Donna
>
> From: Lars Hoffmann [mailto:lars.hoffmann at icann.org<mailto:
> lars.hoffmann at icann.org>]
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 June 2015 12:43 AM
> To: Donna Austin; Steve Chan; gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:
> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> Dear Donna,
>
> Thank you for your note. There is currently a Cross Community Working
> Group on the Use of Country and Territory Names as Top-Level Domains (see
> here<https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=48346463>)
> working on at least part of this issue. You might recall that Heather
> provided an update to the GNSO Council as the Group’s co-Chair during the
> last Council call (transcript here<
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-council-21may15-en.pdf>). To
> assure you, and others, the Group is very much aware of the GAC’s work and
> is trying to coordinate their respective  efforts to avoid a situation
> where the GAC’s potential future advise on geographic names conflicts with
> anything the CWG is producing. Please note that the CWG is meeting
> bi-weekly and the number of GNSO members is not as prominent as it could
> be  - as also pointed out by Heather.
>
> In addition, Heather will send out a call to the GNSO Council to provide
> informal feedback on the CWG’s work, including the potential overlap with
> the GAC’s work later today; any feedback you – and others – can provide
> will be most welcome in the CWG’s discussions.
>
> Many thanks and best wishes,
> Lars
>
>
>
>
> From: Donna Austin <Donna.Austin at ariservices.com<mailto:
> Donna.Austin at ariservices.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, 3 June 2015 01:49
> To: Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org<mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>>, "<
> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>>" <
> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> Steve, All
>
> I have another question—sorry
>
> As we all know the GAC has a working group on Geographic Names, which
> seems to be intent on expanding the definition to include potentially
> thousands of strings. The AGB had a moratorium on the ability to apply for
> country/territory names at the top level in the first round.
>
> Is it the intention of the DG that this be picked up as part of the next
> round PDP, or perhaps dealt with as a distinct and separate issue elsewhere.
>
> Apologies if this has been covered previously and I missed it.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Donna
>
> <image001.png>DONNA AUSTIN
> Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
>
> ARI REGISTRY SERVICES
> Melbourne|Los Angeles
> P  +1 310 890 9655<tel:%2B1%20310%20890%209655>
> P  +61 3 9866 3710<tel:%2B61%203%209866%203710>
> E  donna.austin at ariservices.com<mailto:donna.austin at ariservices.com>
> W  www.ariservices.com<http://www.ariservices.com/>
>
> Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/ARIservices>
>
> The information contained in this communication is intended for the named
> recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally
> privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended
> recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance
> on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all
> copies from your system and notify us immediately.
>
>
>
> From:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:
> gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:
> gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan
> Sent: Monday, 1 June 2015 3:56 PM
> To: gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> All,
>
> I have made the following updates to the draft charter:
>
>   *   Incorporated the suggestion from Donna Austin from 27 May
>   *   Made the change suggested by Philip Sheppard and the BRG, although I
> made it far more general because as Philip noted, the set of circumstances
> described would not be limited to just .brands.
>   *   Regarding the comments from Thomas Lowenhaupt, I did not make a
> change in the charter, but instead made a change in the matrix, where I
> included a link to Thomas’ Wiki post about Informed Consent, so that it can
> be considered in full by a possible WG.
> The latest versions are attached and also available on the Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/DGNGSR/DRAFT+Deliverables. If there
> are any disagreements with how the items have been captured, do of course
> let me know and I’ll be happy to update.
>
> When we reach the finish line, I’ll once again integrate the DG's three
> documents into a single, clean document.
>
> Best,
> Steve
>
>
> From: "philip at brandregistrygroup.org<mailto:philip at brandregistrygroup.org>"
> <philip at brandregistrygroup.org<mailto:philip at brandregistrygroup.org>>
> Date: Monday, June 1, 2015 at 3:46 AM
> To: "gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>" <
> gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>>
> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] Additional item to charter: application by
> previous applicant
>
> Steve, Jeff, Bret,
>
> a BRG member has made this suggestion which I think could be wider than
> just .brands. Could you agree to add it to the Charter maybe in Section II,
> Group 1, around the bullet "Different TLD Types? Feel free to turn the text
> into the style of the Charter.
>
>
> Philip Sheppard
> Director General
> Brand Registry Group
> www.brandregistrygroup.org<http://www.brandregistrygroup.org>
>
> ----------------------------
>
> Application by a previous applicant
> In case a (.brand) RO (from the first round) applies for another (.brand)
> gTLD in the subsequent application window, certain requirements of the
> application could be shortened, reduced of even omitted (e.g., financial,
> technical, administrative, etc.) in case such RO is duly fulfilling its
> current RA and running its (.brand) gTLD. It seems some time could be saved
> during the application process if ICANN validates most of the the RO
> information.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>
> <image001.png>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-dg/attachments/20150604/70154536/attachment-0001.html>