[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Comment on Paragraph 1 of the Scope of Terms of Reference

[Nick Wenban-Smith]

+1 from me too Jeff

But my next question was whether there was now any need for any of the second paragraph? Just move onto to the next para where we take account of the previous work and the current rules as set out in AGB2012.

Nick Wenban-Smith
General Counsel | Nominet
T: +44 (0) 1865 332211

Nominet is a trading name of Nominet UK. Nominet UK is a limited company registered in England and Wales. Registration number: 3203859. Registered office: Minerva House, Edmund Halley Road, Oxford Science Park, Oxford OX4 4DQ.
This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not read, use or disclose the contents of this email. If you receive this email in error, please advise us immediately and delete the email.
Nominet UK has taken every reasonable precaution to ensure that any attachment to this e-mail has been swept for viruses. However, Nominet UK cannot accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of software viruses and would advise that you carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachment.

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Neuman
Sent: 30 November 2017 14:51
To: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Comment on Paragraph 1 of the Scope of Terms of Reference


With respect to the Scope of the Terms of Reference, please keep in mind that this section refers only to what will be discussed.  It is intended to make sure the right questions are being asked and the right topics are being covered.  It should also be neutral in nature to allow all sides of an issue to be discussed.


Therefore, may I suggest a slight rewording of that first paragraph to the following:


Work Track 5 will focus on developing proposed recommendations regarding the treatment of geographic names at the top level (both in ASCII and IDN form), including whether such names require consent or non-objection from applicable governmental authorities, evaluation criteria and potential grounds for objection.

This shorter rewording moves the consent or non-objection part up in the paragraph from where it is now.  The new wording does not preclude any discussions on "approvals" nor does it implicitly endorse an approval-based model.  It (hopefully) is neutral and by virtue of having the word "consent" in the paragraph will naturally lead to discussions on how one obtains consent or non-objection if required.

In addition, the term consent is already in the Applicant Guidebook, so it is a term that we are all familiar with.  And finally, according to http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/consent, the term "Consent" is synonymous with, "approval, assent, authorization, permission, allowance, acquiescence", etc.

This is being provided as a suggestion only to move forward the conversation.  It is not being provided in any official capacity.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Senior Vice President |Valideus USA | Com Laude USA
1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600
Mclean, VA 22102, United States
E: jeff.neuman at valideus.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at valideus.com> or jeff.neuman at comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
T: +1.703.635.7514
M: +1.202.549.5079
@Jintlaw

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20171130/f86e0402/attachment.html>