<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Just bringing us back
to this possible solution -- we don't have to reinvent the
wheel. We could set the size of a city at 1 million or more
residents within the metropolitan area as identified by the U.N.
-- i.e. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/the_worlds_cities_in_2016_data_booklet.pdf">http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/the_worlds_cities_in_2016_data_booklet.pdf</a>
</font><br>
</p>
I think anything this large has some inherent rights that a shoe
company (or any other commercial venture) would not have. Cities
satisfying this condition would be on a priority list. This would
cover a large swath of the problems re city gTLDs. For the rest, I
agree with Alexander's points below. <br>
<br>
Marita Moll<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/7/2018 2:25 PM, Alexander Schubert
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:017b01d3e630$cec7dde0$6c5799a0$@schubert.berlin">
<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:"Comic Sans MS";
panose-1:3 15 7 2 3 3 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Comic Sans MS";
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle26
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:595.0pt 842.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Paul,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<br>
<br>
Alexander.berlin<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Paul Rosenzweig<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 07, 2018 4:47 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no">annebeth.lange@norid.no</a>; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call:
city names<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Paul
Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">M: +1 (202)
329-9650<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">VOIP: +1
(202) 738 1739<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch"
moz-do-not-send="true">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>
<<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch"
moz-do-not-send="true">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 7, 2018 9:40 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a
href="mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</a>;
<a href="mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no"
moz-do-not-send="true">annebeth.lange@norid.no</a>; <a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> AW: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Conference call:
city names<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="DE-CH">Dear
Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="DE-CH"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Best regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Jorge <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>