[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2] recording, Attendance, AC recording and AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues 30 March 2017

Terri Agnew terri.agnew at icann.org
Thu Mar 30 23:30:08 UTC 2017 

Dear All,

 

Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email.
The AC recording and AC Chat are listed below for the New gTLD Subsequent
Procedures Sub Team - Track 2 - Legal/Regulatory Issues held on Thursday, 30
March 2017 at 21:00 UTC. 

 

Adobe Connect recording (audio and visual):
<https://participate.icann.org/p7ewzny0u4m/?OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=40844f1d049ed36d
8b5428de305871e4377fc5dc11a1c7741645e01567ccb573>
https://participate.icann.org/p7ewzny0u4m/

 

The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar>
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar

 

** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list **

 

Mailing list archives:  <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2>
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2

 

Agenda Wiki page:  <https://community.icann.org/x/BLHRAw>
https://community.icann.org/x/BLHRAw

 

 

Thank you.

Kind regards,

Terri 

 

-------------------------------

Adobe Connect chat transcript for 30 March 2017

    

    Terri Agnew:Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team -
Track 2 - Legal/Regulatory Issues on Thursday, 30 March 2017 at 21:00 UTC

  Terri Agnew:agenda wiki page:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_B
LHRAw
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_
BLHRAw&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpC
IgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=F3OBX_sw3Shh2PhomHVXEzl7EpTVRzLIeSPylhD5B1
A&s=D2nMqTyVRu6G7NyMp6dieDECbwAYRmo2Wghfz9bp9Nk&e>
&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=F3OBX_sw3Shh2PhomHVXEzl7EpTVRzLIeSPylhD5B1A&s=D2
nMqTyVRu6G7NyMp6dieDECbwAYRmo2Wghfz9bp9Nk&e= 

  Michael Flemming 2:Terri lets give it another 2 minutes

  Steve Coates:Loud and clear.

  Karen Day:sounds fine

  Jeff Neuman:were with you

  Steve Chan:Summary of public comments available here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system
_files_files_report-2Dcomments-2Dclosed-2Dgeneric-2D08jul13-2Den.pdf
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_syste
m_files_files_report-2Dcomments-2Dclosed-2Dgeneric-2D08jul13-2Den.pdf&d=DwIF
aQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9
Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=F3OBX_sw3Shh2PhomHVXEzl7EpTVRzLIeSPylhD5B1A&s=9cBLIAsRs
OLljcnwailwNfXlwHLCVegLOi3IJ60H4nU&e>
&d=DwIFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXh
FzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=F3OBX_sw3Shh2PhomHVXEzl7EpTVRzLIeSPylhD5B1A&s=9c
BLIAsRsOLljcnwailwNfXlwHLCVegLOi3IJ60H4nU&e= 

  Emily Barabas:everyone can now scroll through the document

  Jeff Neuman:pros

  Steve Coates:Pros

  Kurt Pritz:I think we should assume people read them

  Jeff Neuman:I think we should go through them all and get thoughts as to
which people view persuasive

  Phil Buckingham:Ag,ree Michael - that is what these new GTLDs are about ,
right 

  Emily Barabas:Michael, there are a few more Pros on the next page as well

  Michael Flemming 2:I will make sure to get those.

  Michael Flemming 2:Thank you.

  Jeff Neuman:So in theory, although a closed generic may harm a
registrant's ability to get a domain name in that TLD, but at the end of the
day, the use of the TLD in a closed generic may actually be more beneficial
for the end user (the closed TLD's customer)

  Steve Coates:I don't understand this one.

  Phil Buckingham:Jeff , I am confused !   These are CLOSED  generics - so
the end users are not customers - there is no arms length transaction.  

  Steve Coates:Who the domain owner is, if it's a closed generic.

  Emily Barabas:Steve -- I will see if I can find the original comment that
this came from

  Emily Barabas:If ICANN regulates the right of domain name registrants to
operate closed generics, ICANNwould actually limit free expression by
imposing collective obligations and top-down regulationson domain owners.
NCSG Members (4 Mar. 2013); M. Rodenbaugh (6 Mar. 2013)

  Gg Levine (NABP):Wouldn't a closed generic be operated as a .brand?

  Steve Coates:If registrants are barred from a closed generic, then I don't
see how the collective obligations/top down regulations come into play.  

  Steve Coates:That seems much clearer to me, Jeff.  Perhaps "domain owners"
then should be "TLD applicants." 

  Michael Flemming 2:Jeff, could I ask you to speak for another minute,
please? I need to get a drink of water.

  Michael Flemming 2:I'm back

  Samantha Demetriou:It seems to me that if ICANN wades into making
decisions on behalf of a "consumer" in this context it gets into content
regulation, which is outside its remit

  Phil Buckingham:There fore there is  a direct relationship between the top
level ( the owner )  and the end user .  Therefore  the owner (can )
CONTROLS  who their end users  are.  Surely this  is anti competitive ,
limit consumer choice .

  Michael Flemming 2:Jeff, you are in the can again.

  Steve Coates:Cant hear you, Jeff.

  Terri Agnew:@Jeff, you have become muffled

  Terri Agnew:@Jeff, audio is better

  Phil Buckingham:lots better Jeff 

  Karen Day:@Phil - how is it anti competitive? You aren't limiting who can
offer similar services?  Just like with a trademark,  to companies can offer
identical services, but can't use the same name.  Why can't 1 compnay have a
TLD and not another?

  Steve Coates:What does the CCT say about public interest?  Anyone?

  Jeff Neuman:They have not addressed this topic

  Steve Coates:Barely.

  Jeff Neuman:yes

  Karen Day:barely

  Terri Agnew:@Samantha, much better

  Phil Buckingham:Agree , Samantha ,  but where  do you draw the  line 

  Samantha Demetriou:Not at all, Jeff, just trying to keep the convo going
:)

  Kurt Pritz:@ Jeff - The rules were set out in advance - "closed generics"
were allowed

  Gg Levine (NABP):Don't the safeguards, which the board requires, address
the interests of end users?

  Jeff Neuman:Gg - in the safeguard, the end users are those that go to
websites, email, etc.  IN this case, ICANN decided that "safeguards" were
needed for registrants in the form of protecting their right to register
domain names

  Samantha Demetriou:You could interpret that once icann made the decision
to disallow CGs, they defined public interest as protecting the open
marketplace for registrants

  Gg Levine (NABP):Jeff - right, but is that consistent with their other
decisions?

  Emily Barabas:For those following along in the report, arguments for the
case-by-case approach are on page 23

  Jeff Neuman:I think case by case would be too difficult and put ICANN in a
very tough if not impossible position

  Samantha Demetriou:+1 to Jeff

  Kurt Pritz:@ Jeff - no kidding. Can you imagine a public interest review
panel?

  Jeff Neuman:I would like to serve on that panel ;)

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2:shudder 

  Karen Day:Totally agree jeff.  Just look at the Spec 9 decisions - totally
inconsistant.

  avri doria:i was trying to imagne a public nterest panel

  Steve Coates:I would rather watch a public interest panel.  

  Steve Coates:I'd love to see some metrics on this for Round 1.  How many
traditional domain industry insiders filed for closed generics, versus new
players to the industry.

  Jeff Neuman:nope

  Jeff Neuman:I would think industry insiders applied for open generic TLDs
because that was the model they were used to and that is how they make money
(selling registrations).s

  Jeff Neuman:I cant think of any industry insider that applied for a closed
generic

  Steve Coates:Do we have a list of closed generics?

  Jeff Neuman:@Steve - you mean the list of those that initially applied as
closed generics>

  Jeff Neuman:because there are no closed generics now

  Kurt Pritz:Two comments: (1) Isn't the world's largest book seller
operating .book the wet dream of the new gTLD program? We would have already
seen innovation, not to mention the attention it would have brought to the
new gTLD program (which is sorely lacking in public recognition); why should
that be stifled? (2) at the end of the day, these are just domain names.
What is the difference between .book and book.com? Everything is temporary.
One party might have control for a while but resources always flow to the
parties that value them most highly. 

  Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) 2:thanks everyone...  bye for now then... 

  Karen Day:bye all!

  Jeff Neuman:thanks

  avri doria:guess everyone else needs to stay on line.

  Cecilia Smith:bye!!

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2/attachments/20170330/96dc0955/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Track2 - 30 March 2017.mp3
Type: audio/mpeg
Size: 7167373 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2/attachments/20170330/96dc0955/Track2-30March2017-0001.mp3>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: attendance TRACK 2 30 March 2017.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 331273 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2/attachments/20170330/96dc0955/attendanceTRACK230March2017-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5018 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2/attachments/20170330/96dc0955/smime-0001.p7s>

More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2 mailing list