<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></head><body style='font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif'>
<p>Alexander,</p>
<p>I like your practical idea in principle {<span>population size cut-off}</span>, but why not thinking about "relative" size? Why not the 10 largest cities in a country? Or the 3 largest cities in a sub-national region? Why not give a chance to small countries and smaller populations?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Please think about about poor LUZERN! They didn't join the Swiss confederation right away in 1315. But after a few year they did 1332. Just because Luzern is a small canton and Luzern city is much smaller than quite a few Swiss cities I would hate if your cut-off rules would leave Luzern out. I actually don't care much about Luzern, because Lausanne is my city of citizenship and wouldn't like people across the world "confusing" Lucerne Food with Lausanne, but since Lausanne joined the confederation much later in 1536 and I used Luzern because somebody suggested earlier to use it for a food company not even based in Siwtzerland (a notational insult to Nestle by the way).</em></p>
<p><br /></p>
<p>Do you recognize how absurd this City Sub-Sub-Track is getting?????????? Frankly I think the CITY idea is getting us off-track badly.</p>
<p><br /></p>
<div>---<br />
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez<br /> <br /> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----<br /><br /> mQENBFqh7xwBCAC7PBUUek72U8teLrAieWI+JBo/nz0rQObzKgzGNWm2bb+i90mD<br /> roNsrvwDJiGOsB/VAhJy6ilIhs++QrxhVEzMz6oKJa8ANaNNvnK2Z8heYm1aC97E<br /> qY6y1z853b6F3XrN8262dor9NZEqaK28NVwLsFTfkGKhb4f3rJlCDmhwxt5VHhBQ<br /> MHKGxyutq0fyJpG6QpoAoRLaYXrq+xjXARhN9JBjeRRzbjnBbWt7+lRdCrZdOxfD<br /> ivRut9F2zMJq8RmeI5goTcq03IRLtKf41A6Np5K//HLe7GlHWH9g4pSKF+UB+EMe<br /> S506TxI0dVbyT3jlTnhhfNA/bpQXHcdCZ5EhABEBAAG0F2Nhcmxvc3JhdWxAZ3V0<br /> aWVycmV6LnNliQEcBBABAgAGBQJaoe8cAAoJEOkK/VKjr2tvztgH/1zInwNszd4w<br /> 21UilxVmXX2J1SPZG6xXwbwU5BukIm7iBVYwxxPlIAZdJbG0/QynK2oWU1e1Zjed<br /> vBemfJtjOn2yRWo3P13PUV/2/trHWgUk5bA3eIUbWDW5fQRLW+TaHC7TuRKgRaJC<br /> NgdBItEniQz7DakGzld3PWmsTvIWd4N/fqzATD3DOZmONF52lyVuAEvKoF4rMRTR<br /> emvCrL66xEu19u9+Urk7R+DQuFQMNuX0MqC6/vIsmXYZPH7jnV6ZDyzb0BUnjYcx<br /> 6MH/YwJx29yjA4iN1NpwCpy1hc+YP1oavz2t+6isM6wB0mXlAazw2d83zwypsH6C<br /> 8xgjuRFm9xQ=<br /> =RX04<br /> -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----</div>
</div>
<p><br /></p>
<p>El 2018-05-07 12:25, Alexander Schubert escribió:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Paul,<!-- o ignored --></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think there is already a valid solution on the table:<br /><br />A population size cut-off: A city gets only "priority" if it has more than "X" inhabitants. And ONLY all cities with identical name and more than "X" inhabitants have to provide a letter! Easy solution – and MUCH better than depriving ALL inhabitants of ALL cities of their ability to identify themselves via their city gTLD: one that is approved by the city and therefore likely an effort by the constituents of said city: and not some money-hungry "gTLD investors" which want to flood the market with THOUSANDS of uniform gTLDs as profit centers and cash cows.<!-- o ignored --></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<br /><br />Alexander.berlin<!-- o ignored --></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<div>
<div style="border: none; border-top: solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt; padding: 3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>From:</strong> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] <strong>On Behalf Of </strong>Paul Rosenzweig<br /><strong>Sent:</strong> Monday, May 07, 2018 4:47 PM<br /><strong>To:</strong> Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; annebeth.lange@norid.no; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<br /><strong>Subject:</strong> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names<!-- o ignored --></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">If your proposal really is that every city in the world that has Athens in its name must sign off on who gets Athens or that the city of Sandwich MA (as small but pleasant place BTW) can stop the delegation of Sandwich, I disagree.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">My feasible solution is simple – nobody gets priority. When/If the .sandwich TLD is offered up, everyone should get notice of that fact. We might even send as special invitatation to Sandwich MA and Sandwich, UK (and any other Sandwichs out there) all of who can, if they choose, submit applications. The one that meets the criteria best, gets the TLD, just like in any other auction. <!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Works quite well. And if the .Sandwich folks run afoul of local Sandwich law in the UK, they'll have to deal with it in the UK. Your proposal that "it is up to the parties" to get the best result is exactly right. The problem is that you would give Lucerne a veto power. Everyone who studies economics knows that this sort of priority causes rent-seeking, distorts markets and is economically counter-productive. I understand why Lucerne wants to export its rights globally. I would too in their position. But recognizing local law applied locally is not the same as giving global effect to Swiss law.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Paul<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Paul Rosenzweig<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">M: +1 (202) 329-9650<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<div>
<div style="border: none; border-top: solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt; padding: 3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>From:</strong> <a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a> <<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>> <br /><strong>Sent:</strong> Monday, May 7, 2018 9:40 AM<br /><strong>To:</strong> <a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a>; <a href="mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no">annebeth.lange@norid.no</a>; <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br /><strong>Subject:</strong> AW: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call: city names<!-- o ignored --></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><!-- o ignored --> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Dear Paul<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Thanks for dropping that „international law" „requirement". It certainly would be useful if you also considered the importance of the Bylaws provision that ICANN has to act in conformity with applicable local law. You may not like that, but it is a fact of the framework we work with.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Apart from that, as far as I know this discussion about "letter of non-objection" is about obtaining a non-objection from the relevant public authorities. If there are multiple cities with the very same name, from all of them equally, as is provided for in the AGB.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Obtaining the letter of non-objection is a requirement for the application to go forward, but does not give you a "right" to the TLD – that will depend on complying with all the other requirements and going through all the process. <!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">And obtaining such a letter is open to any interested applicants, be it brand owners with interests on trademarks which may coincide with that city name, be it communities, be it private business, etc.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">It is up to the parties to come up with the best agreement in their shared interest.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">I would appreciate that you would propose constructive and feasible solutions that would respect the interests and rights of cities in their names. Just ignoring such interests and rights is the best recipe for protracted conflicts between applicants and relevant public authorities, which is something we have seen happening in some applications regarding terms with geographic significance not falling under the "non-objection" rule.<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Best regards<!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;">Jorge <!-- o ignored --></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #1f497d;"><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><!-- o ignored --> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
<!-- html ignored --><br />
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">_______________________________________________<br /> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list<br /> <a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br /> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5</a></div>
</blockquote>
</body></html>