[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments

Thu Jun 28 17:21:10 UTC 2018

That's right -- although in some areas, one might also have to deal with 
one level up -- which in Canada are the provinces. If a province wanted 
to change the name of a city, here in Ontario,Canada, the city has to 
comply. Things are always changing. In 1998, the province forced an 
amalgamation which created Metro Toronto out of the regional 
municipality of *Metropolitan Toronto*and its six constituent 
municipalities. As part of this, East York, Etobicoke, North York, 
Scarborough, York, and the City of *Toronto*(1834) were dissolved by an 
act of the Government of Ontario.

This happens with countries as well of course (USSR), but it will happen 
much more frequently with cities. That's another reason to go with a 
size definition with a few other options for smaller states and perhaps 
some leeway for historical reasons. The larger the city, the more stable 
the name. I have no evidence of that, but it seems to make sense.

Marita

On 6/28/2018 10:11 AM, Alexander Schubert wrote:
>
> Dear Group,
>
> We are always talking about “Government Support” – and many here share 
> a healthy distain for “Governments” (especially “Federal 
> Governments”). But an applicant for a non-capital city doesn’t need 
> the support by the “federal government” of the respective nation; it 
> is the CITY GOVERNMENT that decides! These are city constituent based 
> city representatives! They know their city best!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 
> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Paul 
> Rosenzweig
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 28, 2018 1:27 AM
> *To:* Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch; gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures 
> PDP: Work Track 5 Comments
>
> No, I didn’t overlook that.  It just transfers the burden to someone 
> else and either makes ICANN the judge of ambiguity or makes ambiguity 
> the rule.
>
> And, no, this is not an easy task … I’m glad you think it is … so I 
> invite the Swiss government to do it for the world :0)
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com 
> <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>
>
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>
> www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>
>
> My PGP Key: 
> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684
>
> *From:*Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch 
> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch 
> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:31 PM
> *To:* paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com 
> <mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>; 
> gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* AW: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures 
> PDP: Work Track 5 Comments
>
> Dear Paul
>
> You may overlooked that I suggested that this information may be 
> assembled by ICANN and offered to potential applicants through e.g. an 
> advisory panel – see points (3) and (4) I proposed at the beginning…
>
> In the age of big data that should be simple.
>
> sorry if I did not express this with absolute clarity…
>
> Best
>
> Jorge
>
> *Von:*Paul Rosenzweig [mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com]
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2018 16:26
> *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch 
> <mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>>; gregshatanipc at gmail.com 
> <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Betreff:* RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures 
> PDP: Work Track 5 Comments
>
> I’m not sure that can work – now an applicant would have to be 
> familiar with the law of 190+ nations to determine which are “cities” 
> and which are not and therefore which need to pre-clear the 
> application and which don’t.
>
> ICANN is an international organization.  It works because it relies on 
> international standards.  If there is an international standard on 
> what defines a city, that’s a plausible ground (though I would 
> disagree with it in substance).  The idea that an applicant needs to 
> know Swiss law and Bhutanese law and Kazahk law on defining cities is 
> simply not realistic.
>
> Paul
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
>
> *From:*Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>> *On Behalf Of 
> *Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2018 6:17 PM
> *To:* gregshatanipc at gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures 
> PDP: Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180628/301591fb/attachment-0001.html>