[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.

Carlos Raul Gutierrez carlosraul at gutierrez.se
Sun Aug 19 15:09:43 UTC 2018 

I fully concur with the Anti - government bias. Governments are an equal stakeholder and to the best of my knowledge there no Non-governmental Constituency Group (yet) in ICANN.

On August 17, 2018 9:01:33 AM CST, Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
>I do not understand the anti 
>government sentiments of some people 
>It is a little standing issue. 
>We need to work together in a fair basis 
>There are no unfounded and baseless reservation
>Whatever could be categorised 
>as unfounded or baseless are to ignore
> the very right of the people of countries.
>This has nothing to do with governments
>There is no legitimacy on these claims 
>They are considered as invasion of country babes whether 
>Two letter or three letters
>Regards
>
>
>
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 17 Aug 2018, at 04:46, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> 
>> Alfredo, we have been excluding  many actors  under the baseless and
>ideological "reserved names".  I am not in favor of exclusionary actors
>here. I am in search of inclusiveness. Whoever can come up with the
>most inclusive idea, I am up for it, when it comes to generic/geo names
>that correspond to brands and generic names. Would that be the
>governments? I doubt it. They are going to apply their local
>"exclusionary" laws on generic names. Would that be the trademark
>owners, I doubt it. They want to protect their brands. If a brand name
>resonates with a generic or geo name, they should allow those names to
>register. same as the governments. What has been happening until now,
>has been exclusionary and political. why can't .Persiangulf exist and
>someone be able to register ihate.persiangulf? why can't .persiangulf
>registry be in operation and some entity also come up with the
>application of .arabiangulf? It's sad. but we are here at  ICANN and
>WT5 to exclude domain name registrants and registry ideas, and I am the
>last person to be in favor of it. 
>> 
>> 
>> Farzaneh
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 3:40 PM Alfredo Calderon
><calderon.alfredo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dear Farzaneh, I appreciate your comment. You seem to exclude two
>sectors that could manage requests. Whom do you propose should have the
>responsibility? 
>>> 
>>>> 		
>>>> Alfredo Calderon
>>>> eLearning Consultant 
>>>> calderon.alfredo at gmail.com
>|http://aprendizajedistancia.blogspot.com | Skype: Alfredo_1212|
>wiseintro.co/alfredocalderon
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Get your own email signature
>>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 11, 2018, at 3:31 PM, farzaneh badii
><farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I don't agree at all. This can lead to government overreach in
>generic names. I don't know why the government enthusiasts feel it's
>appropriate that cctld operators that are private in nature to be
>granted such powers either.  
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 3:14 PM Alfredo Calderon
><calderon.alfredo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have been following the recent discussion of 3 letter TLD’s by
>Carlos Raul and the rest of the group members.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Carlos Raul’s wording 
>>>>> 
>>>>> “ICANN may only consider applications of ISO 3166-1 Alpha 3 Letter
>Codes submitted by relevant governmental authorities, ccTLD managers
>and public interest/public benefit entities.” 
>>>>> 
>>>>> makes sense. We ICANN org would be delegating the responsibility
>to governments to ensure the validity of the requests. Therefore I
>support Carlos Raul’s suggestion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Alfredo Calderon
>>>>> Email: calderon.alfredo at gmail.com
>>>>> Twitter: acalderon52
>>>>> LinkedIn: pr.linkedin.com/in/acalderon52
>>>>> Skype: alfredo_1212
>>>>> Business Card: http://myonepage.com/acalderon
>>>>> Blog: aprendizajedistancia.blogspot.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2018, at 12:00 PM, Carlos Raul Gutierrez
><carlosraul at gutierrez.se> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear Annebeth,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As you have heard me (too) many times before, I admire the track
>record of preceding, clearly focused public interest 3 letter geo-TLDs,
>like the ones from Catalonia in Spain, Brittany's in France, and
>Serbia's 3 letter TLDs
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Now that I re-stated my rationale for such a clear-cut public
>interest case in an email to Rosalia (for geo use ONLY, accessible
>-i.e. cheap- and non-profit), I hereby submit to the WT my final
>revised language suggestion, which is ONLY applicable for 3-Letter
>codes. It would substitute the following final paragraph in the
>relevant section which deals with 3 Letter codes: “The SubPro may want
>to consider recommending whether any future
>application/revision/delegation process to be established (either
>generic or restricted to the Geographic categories only), should
>determine if, when, and how specific interested parties, such as
>relevant public international, national or sub-national public
>authorities, may apply for country and territory names"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My suggestion for a FORWARD looking option is:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> “ICANN may only consider applications of ISO 3166-1 Alpha 3
>Letter Codes submitted by relevant governmental authorities, ccTLD
>managers and public interest/public benefit entities.”
>>>>>> This paragraph is, in my view, a sensible part of a
>forward-looking recommendation that could go ahead with broader WT
>consensus. And if it does not, please make sure it is recorded as an
>objection against a permanent restriction of the delegation of ISO
>3letter list.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks to all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>>>>>> carlosraul at gutierrez.se
>>>>>> +506 8837 7176
>>>>>> Aparatado 1571-1000
>>>>>> COSTA RICA
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> El 2018-08-08 14:48, Annebeth Lange escribió:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Carlos
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Could I ask you for one clarification? If we open up for some
>2-letter/letter combinations in the GNSO process, they will
>automatically be gTLDs. You don't think that will disturb the
>distinction we have had from the beginning that 2-characters are ccTLDs
>and 3 or more gTLDs?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>> Annebeth
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Annebeth B Lange
>>>>>>> Special Adviser International Policy
>>>>>>> UNINETT Norid AS
>>>>>>> Phone: +47 959 11 559
>>>>>>> Mail: annebeth.lange at norid.no
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 8. aug. 2018 kl. 22:43 skrev Carlos Raul Gutierrez
><carlosraul at gutierrez.se>:
>>>>>>>> My comments to today's call:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1. "The ICANN Community may want to consider whether a future
>process should be established or determine if, when, and how specific
>interested parties, such as relevant government authorities, may apply
>for country and territory names" This paragraph is the only sensible
>part of a forward-looking recommendation and should/could be redrafted.
>I wonder if it could be enhanced, or if the only way to go is deletion
>as CW suggested.   A shorter more concise version? A more "liberal"
>version? How about: "ICANN may consider applications by specific
>interested parties, such as relevant authorities, of strings that are
>not current or future countries or territories."  Ps: The text in
>Recommendation 1 "reserving ALL two character letter letter"
>combinations-  can be enhanced.  I wonder if it's truly ALL, or if the
>potential for future countries and potential combinations is really
>much less broad? Could that be qualified somehow? I can't think of a
>future .xx or .ññ country or territory and maybe we could tweak the
>language to open this a bit and garner broad community support to move
>forward.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2. Other than recommendation #1, I object strongly the text to
>"keep geo names from the delegation" in any other recommedation, unless
>a clear rationale is added to the recommendation
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 3. I hope no draft goes out before a substantial non-AGB names
>discussion has taken place, including to geographic related, cultural,
>linguistic and other social  elements, ,like Apache Nation
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>>>>>>>> carlosraul at gutierrez.se
>>>>>>>> +506 8837 7176
>>>>>>>> Aparatado 1571-1000
>>>>>>>> COSTA RICA
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> El 2018-08-08 05:09, Emily Barabas escribió:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Dear Work Track members,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please find attached suggested revisions to the draft
>recommendations shared yesterday. Please note that this revised text
>includes clarifications and typo corrections only. Feedback on some of
>the more substantive issues will be discussed further on today's call.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Emily
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
><gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Martin Sutton
><martin at brandregistrygroup.org>
>>>>>>>> Date: Monday, 6 August 2018 at 14:45
>>>>>>>> To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org"
><gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
>>>>>>>> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan &
>Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our
>call.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Dear Work Track members,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please find below the proposed agenda for the WT5 call on
>Wednesday 8 August at 13:00 UTC:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates
>>>>>>>> 2. Review of Consensus Call Process and Work Plan
>>>>>>>> 3. Consensus Call on Country and Territory Names
>>>>>>>> 4. Wrap Up - Non-AGB Terms
>>>>>>>> 5. AOB
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On our upcoming call, the leadership team will introduce a work
>plan aimed at wrapping up WT5's work and delivering an Initial Report
>by the end of September. In maintaining this timeline, the leadership
>is seeking to ensure that Work Track 5 inputs can be effectively
>integrated into the work of the broader New gTLD Subsequent Procedures
>PDP Working Group in time for delivery of the PDP's Final Report. A
>copy of the work plan is attached.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> As outlined in the work plan, the leadership team will be
>holding a series of consensus calls on potential recommendations to
>include in WT5's Initial Report. These will be introduced in clusters,
>with the first set of recommendations focusing on country and territory
>names. The draft recommendations, which will be discussed on Wednesday,
>are attached. Work Track members are encouraged to review and provide
>feedback on these draft recommendations prior to the call on Wednesday.
>The leadership team will officially open the consensus call on this
>topic following Wednesday's call. For more information on the consensus
>call process that will be followed, please see the GNSO Working Group
>Guidelines, Section
>3.6:https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-18jun18-en.pdf
>[gnso.icann.org].
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If you need a dial out for the upcoming call or would like to
>send an apology, please email gnso-secs at icann.org.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> WT5 Co-Leads
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Annebeth Lange
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Javier Rua
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Olga Cavalli
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Martin Sutton
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The contents of this email message and any attachments are
>intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential
>and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from
>disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or
>their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error,
>please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this
>message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you
>are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of
>this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>>>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>>>>>>>> <Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.pdf>
>>>>>>>> <Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.docx>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>>>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>>>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>>>>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>>>> -- 
>>>> Farzaneh
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180819/b7686773/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list