<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Title content=""><meta name=Keywords content=""><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Apple Color Emoji";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Dear Work Track members,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Please see below the action items and notes from the meeting today. <i>These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording or transcript.</i> See the chat transcript and recording at: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/LgEhB">https://community.icann.org/x/LgEhB</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Slides are attached for reference.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Steve<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Notes:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>2. SOI Updates<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> - No updates<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>3. CC2 Comments: Registrant Protections (continued) - Background Checks<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>- Hoping to get feedback from ICANN Org on their experience with background checks and areas for future improvements.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>CC2 Question 2.3.3 (beginning on slide 20)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- RySG - maintain current criteria for background screening<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- John Poole - background requirements should be stricter.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Valideus - applicants that are publicly traded corporations listed and in good standing on any of the worlds largest 25 stock exchanges should not be required to provide detailed information on the entity, officers, directors, and major shareholders if it will not be subject to background screening. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- BRG - Background check requirements not appropriate for all different types of applicants, especially things like personal address, DOB, etc. Same level of info for company directors as appears on corporate web sites should be adequate.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Jannik Skou - geo TLDs and applicants listed on stock exchanges should not go through criminal background checks - already done by public authorities<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Michael F. - difficult, at least in APAC, to negotiate changes to applicant information. Did not always seem to be consistent.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Paul - The standards of background checks don't mean anything if ICANN doesn't do anything with them (e.g., evidence of excessive cybersquatting activity). There should a formal response process when a complaint to the process is filed.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>- The standards should be different for publicly traded companies and other types of companies that have internal governance enforced by other third parties. Could apply to the financial review as well, especially as it relates to dot Brands.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>- Streamlining this process could also lower costs.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Alan - Not all applicants are equal, do differentiating may be ok. Is there another way to achieve the goals without ICANN having to perform the background check itself. Challenges and ability to conduct reviews are different across the world.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Michael F. - Opinions and laws on privacy are vastly different in the world. Availability of relevant information is impacted by this.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Greg - Can waive background checks if there are existing mechanisms, that might be more rigourous, already in place (e.g., conducted internally or through a third party). There might be well recognized existing processes or practices that ICANN could rely on. Need to be flexible to other cultural norms rather than forcing applicants to confirm to ICANN's rules.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Jim - Will GDPR, or other privacy laws, impact the level of information that ICANN can ask for? Michael F. Could depend on purpose and usage.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- CLO - Echoing Heather, relying on public information is most efficient and transparent. In certain locales and jurisdictions, there may be instability that will impact accessibility and and quality of information. The level of comfort is different in different locales as well. Might be helpful to again consider what purpose or goal is.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Paul - Geo TLDs, run by public authorities, presumably do their own due diligence. Lower level of review by ICANN might be warranted.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ACTION ITEM - Determine how GDPR might impact ICANN's ability to conduct background checks. See if that can or is already an element of the legal opinion it's seeking now.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- RySG - Barring cybersquatters makes sense. However, breach of RA or RAA should not, de facto, lead to disqualification.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Valideus - Cybersuatting or registrants losing two or more UDRPs should not be officer of registry.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Jannik Skou - <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Nominet - An applicant who operates a failed gTLD should be scrutinized carefully, but each application should not necessarily be considered dependent.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Alan - How should the policy be adjusted based on the comments being reviewed?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Paul - Claim is different than abjudication of breach. Or cured breach. There are breaches related to paying bills. Need to determine what level of breach should warrant action.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ACTION ITEM - need to determine what types of breaches would warrant action. Maybe reach out to RySG<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br>-- Afilias - advocated for ensuring ICANN is aware of changes in mgmt structure and integrating compliance in to application review process, since they are aware of past and current performance.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- Alan - Compliance should be able to identify past bad actors but may be reluctant to play this role. More about enforcing contracts.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- BRG - due diligence should performed an early stage during the application process. ICANN may have to repeat process prior to signing RA. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>- Michael - This did occur<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- John Poole- why screen twice <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- RySG - At the time of application, changes, and post-contracting cchanges.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-- ALAC - at application and at time of contract signing<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ACTION ITEM - were any applicants disqualified by background screening?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br>Michael - background info needed upon changes, throughout process, during the 2012 round. Also had to be performed twice in many cases (e.g., at application and prior to contracting).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From the chat:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues on Thursday, 07 September 2017 at 21:00 UTC<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: Agenda wiki page: <a href="https://community.icann.org/x/LgEhB">https://community.icann.org/x/LgEhB</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: Are we expecting a small turnout because of Irma and Harvey?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: Could I get slide control please?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: Thx<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Steve Chan: @Michael, slides are unsynced so everyone has control of their own slides<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jeff Neuman: I wish i had a small violin emoji for Adobe Connect<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jon Nevett: For the record, i object to 2 meetings per week<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jon Nevett: there are 5 subgroups and many of us participate on most, if not all of them -- thanks!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Steve Chan: We'll be starting on slide 20<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Steve Chan: Note, you can review the ICANN org feedback on the Background Screening topic in the Program Implementation Review Report here: <a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/program-review-29jan16-en.pdf">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/program-review-29jan16-en.pdf</a> on page 57<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: Sound went crazy for a while.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: yes, seems Michael's audio got suddenly loud<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: Good<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: excellent<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: It's fine now <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: it does sound good now<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: thank you<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alan Greenberg: Sorry to be late.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Emily Barabas: Welcome Alan. We are on slide 24<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alan Greenberg: Where are we in the slide deck?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alan Greenberg: Thanks!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): a point well made in my view Michael <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Agree with Michael<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): then I am also from AP :-)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): Very true Paul! <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jeff Neuman: @Paul - was that an issue of non-enforcement or poor language on affiliates?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Good point Paul. ICANN needs to be transparent about how they respond to these complaints and submissions. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jeff Neuman: or both<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: I agree with that. Transparency but at the same time flexibility for dotBrands. (personal opinion)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alexander Schubert: How about the opposite approach: and impose EXTRA coast on Fortune 500 Corps?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Paul McGrady: I'm for finding ways to lowering application fees for anyone we can - too much wheel spinning in this program.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Heather Forrest: To the extent that we can rely on public information (stock exchanges, court decisions, etc) that is most efficient and transparent<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: +1 Greg (personal opinion)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Heather Forrest: Good question Jim - ICANN is getting a legal opinion. We should see if that's going to be addressed<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Re: GDPR, Consent with certainly play a role, as would public/legitimate interest. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: TMI, Cheryl.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Agree with Heather to make sure that ICANN includes that question in the GDPR readiness project<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: That was Heather's suggestion, not mine. :) But I agree with her. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Heather Forrest: No problem!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alexander Schubert: OBJECTION: The applicant for .chicago might turn that around and claim that ICANN would check them out - so the city doesn't have to do it......<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jon Nevett: probably should add PDDRP loss or two<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: Yes, now that that's a thing.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: PICDRP should probably be included in the evaluation. Although I tend to agree that it shouldn't be defacto. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Paul McGrady: The cybersquatting bar is useless if never enforced by ICANN.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Paul McGrady: Needs to be enforced in the next round.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: +1 paul. I'm really disturbed to hear that evidence of cyberquatting was ignored. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: I also think ICANN should be looking into that proactively and should not wait for submissions. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Michael Flemming: No, we love the feedback. Anyone is welcome.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Jon Nevett: not if a good faith dispute<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: Paul, don't you mean the anti-cybersquatting bar? :-)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Paul is correct. They should look at everything and evaluate whether it impacts their potential obligations as an RO. And the community should set what that means so it's not a subjective evaluation. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Paul McGrady: @Greg - yep. Upside down...<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: @Michael -- randomly, like drug tests?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Julie Bisland: The next New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues will take place on Thursday, 14 September 2017 at 03:00 UTC for 60 minutes.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Kiran Malancharuvil: Thanks Michael. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): bye </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Apple Color Emoji"'>👋</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> the now <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Alexander Schubert: Tnx<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Greg Shatan: Thank you!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Steven Chan</span></b><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"MS Mincho",serif'>
</span></b><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Policy Director, GNSO Support<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>ICANN<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"MS Mincho",serif'>
</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><a href="mailto:steve.chan@icann.org"><span style='color:#0563C1'>steve.chan@icann.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>mobile: +1.310.339.4410<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>office tel: +1.310.301.5800<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>office fax: +1.310.823.8649<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Find out more about the GNSO by taking our i<a href="applewebdata://310CAD3E-E244-4690-A938-C2655DD44BDE/learn.icann.org/courses/gnso"><span style='color:#0563C1'>nteractive courses</span></a> and visiting the <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers"><span style='color:#0563C1'>GNSO Newcomer pages</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Follow @GNSO on Twitter: <a href="https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO"><span style='color:#0563C1'>https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Follow the GNSO on Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/"><span style='color:#0563C1'>https://www.facebook.com/icanngnso/</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/"><span style='color:#0563C1'>http://gnso.icann.org/en/</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>