<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">Hello Greg. I don't
get this reasoning at all.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Best beer of all time
would be subjective. Best Rolex watch of all time -- also
subjective. I don't see how those fit into this equation<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">A small town better
know than a city of 500,000 -- better know globally, that is.
I'd like to hear an example</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">A crime-ridden city --
I don't think we are in the position of making a moral judgement
of this kind.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">At least the size of a
city is a quantitative measure -- once we decide which measure
to take (metropolitan, urban, etc.). There's nothing subjective
about it, nor is it based on any moral judgement. And we would know
exactly how many people would be directly affected. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Marita Moll</font><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/8/2018 8:14 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+aOHUQHT+Dy70U9iBf=9fJfTB66m=weqsE0CBMGUwDeo_bb9Q@mail.gmail.com">
<div>
<div dir="auto">No, it’s not a neutral measure. There is no
neutral hierarchy of legitimate uses.</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">What if it’s a global brand of beer? What if it’s
considered the best beer of all time? What if the town is better
known than the city? What if the city is a crime-ridden hole?
What if it’s luxury goods instead of beer?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">But at least here we are talking about resolving
contention sets among applicants. When we talk about applicants
vs. non-applicants, a hierarchy of favoring use vs. non-use
seems fairly neutral.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Best regards,</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Greg</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:48 PM Marita Moll <<a
href="mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net" moz-do-not-send="true">mmoll@ca.inter.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Well, maybe
we can assume that it would always go to the city of
500,000 because of the number of people who would be
directly negatively affected if the name went to beer
brand. Could that be considered a neutral measure?<br>
</font></p>
</div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Marita Moll<br>
</font></p>
</div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
<div class="m_6928247360478289285moz-cite-prefix">On
6/7/2018 8:34 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>THAT is the question....</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:23
PM, Marita Moll <span><<a
href="mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mmoll@ca.inter.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Just on the
final thought below: I wonder what kinds of
neutral measures there could be to measure
applications. If a city of 500,000 comes along
with the same name as a hamlet of 500 and a
brand of beer -- all seeking to acquire the same
string -- under what conditions would the name
NOT go to the large city. <br>
<span class="m_6928247360478289285HOEnZb"><font
color="#888888"> <br>
Marita Moll</font></span>
<div>
<div class="m_6928247360478289285h5"><br>
<br>
<div
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664moz-cite-prefix">On
6/2/2018 3:08 AM, Liz Williams wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"> The challenge with
these kind of cut off
numbers/percentages/qualifiers is that
they don’t recognise the realities of
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A) numerous examples of where this
just doesn’t work when generic words
clash with trademarks which clash with
geographic terms where no one right is
more valid than any other.</div>
<div>B) competing applications (from the
Perths or Londons or Rocks) of the world
which could be some of the largest
cities in the world to the tiniest
island towns that want to connect their
unique identity to the global internet</div>
<div>C) legitimate dissent where a
geographic location is contested (in all
forms of geographic and cultural
contest) but where it is entirely
feasible for a legitimate application to
be submitted for which freedom of
expression is paramount. Mandating
support or “non-objection” is a
guarantee of failure where the applicant
may have different views to the
government of the day.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We must think clearly about neutral
measures for evaluators to measure
applications…not coming up with select
lists which we will, guaranteed, get
wrong. </div>
<div>Liz
<div><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">….</span><br
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664Apple-interchange-newline"
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">Dr
Liz Williams | International Affairs</span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">.au
Domain Administration Ltd</span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">M:
+61 436 020 595 | +44 7824 877757</span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">E: <a
href="mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">liz.williams@auda.org.au</a> <a
href="http://www.auda.org.au"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.auda.org.au</a></span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none"> </span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">Important
Notice</span><br
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none">
<span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Avenir;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none;display:inline!important;float:none">This
email may contain information which
is confidential and/or subject
to legal privilege, and is
intended for the use of the
named addressee only. If you are
not the intended recipient, you must
not use, disclose or copy any part
of this email. If you have received
this email by mistake, please notify
the sender and delete this message
immediately.</span> </div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 2 Jun 2018, at 12:15 pm,
Justine Chew <<a
href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">justine.chew@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:small">Alexander,<br>
<br>
I very much like the idea of a
percentage of citizens of a
nation as consideration for
qualifying select list of
cities in order to not exclude
smaller cities from protective
measures enjoyed by capital
cities and ISO 3166 Alpha-2
subnational regions.
Percentages would work much
better than absolute values.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br
clear="all">
<div>
<div
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Thank
<div class="gmail_default"
style="font-size:small;display:inline"> you for suggesting this.</div>
<br>
<br>
Justine <br>
-----</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 1
June 2018 at 23:28,
Alexander Schubert <span>
<<a
href="mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">alexander@schubert.berlin</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
name="m_6928247360478289285_m_7986622058443390664_m_1467855337704819413__MailEndCompose"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Greg,</span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">So
in other words
folks who are
trying to preserve
identity rights
for city
inhabitants are
“GEO Supremacists”
in your eyes? I
assume you just
want to showcase
your extreme
displeasure with
the suggested
protective
measures. Just
search “USA
supremacy” in <a
href="http://google.com/" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">google.com</a>;
and you know why
it hurts to be
called a
“supremacist”.
Maybe you weren’t
aware how
insulting the term
is.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
But trying to stay
on the topic
matter:</span></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span>
</span></span></span><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I
think we have
reached general
agreement that
the public
representatives
for inhabitants
of certain
geo-entities
deserve the
unilateral right
to vet an
identical gTLD
application.</span></b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"></span></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:72pt"><span><span>o<span> </span></span></span><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">And
in the languages
that matters! See
Moscow: Even when
only a smaller
percentage of
Muscovites speaks
English – the gTLD
is bilingual; one
gTLD in English
and an IDN version
in Russian. Just
the local language
isn’t enough in a
globalized world.
I am a good
example in this
case: For my
Russian traveling
I use
schubert.moscow –
and I wouldn’t
want an IDN
version. I hope
it’s not too
“supremacist” when
a metropole
desires their
well-known global
brand in the
English language
as well (being a
capital or not –
Moscow was covered
as it is capital).</span></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span>
</span></span></span><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Examples
of the above
mentioned agreed
on protective
measures are
capital cities
or ISO 3166
Alpha-2
subnational
regions. </span></b></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span>
</span></span></span><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">My
suggestion is
that we extend
the same rights
to cities once
these meet a
certain
threshold.</span></b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">
</span></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"
style="margin-left:72pt"><span><span>o<span> </span></span></span><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">You
suggest that this
should be a
“select list”. So
we have to define
the threshold that
defines the
“list”. This could
be an absolute
number of
inhabitants – or a
percentage of
citizens – or the
lower of both
values. Example:
the city needs to
have at minimum
250,000
inhabitants – or
at least 2.5% of
the nation’s
population. The
exact measures
need to be
explored. This way
in countries with
less than 10
Million people
(and that is WELL
more than half of
all countries in
the world)
slightly smaller
cities are
protected as well.
Latvia has 2
Million people –
2.5% equals
50,000! That
protects 4 cities
aside of the
capital. </span></p>
<p
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-m_1467855337704819413MsoListParagraph"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Symbol;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><span>·<span>
</span></span></span><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">If
a city doesn’t
make the “select
list” the 2012
AGB rules apply:
government
support only
required if
geo-use intent.</span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Thanks,<br>
<br>
Alexander<br>
<br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
[mailto:<a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Greg
Shatan<br>
<b>Sent:</b>
Freitag, 1. Juni
2018 06:44<br>
<b>To:</b> Marita
Moll <<a
href="mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mmoll@ca.inter.net</a>></span></p>
<div>
<div
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-h5"><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b>
Re:
[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5]
Qualifying the
threshold for
requirement of
letters of
non-objection!</div>
</div>
<div><br
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div>
<div
class="m_6928247360478289285m_7986622058443390664gmail-h5">
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I’m
in favor of
TLDs being
applied for
and used as
city TLDs by
those cities
or on their
behalf.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I’m
open to the
idea that a
very small and
select list
of cities
would have
veto/blocking/consent/non-objection
privileges
(practically,
they’re all
pretty much
the same) over
any use of a
string
identical to
their name (in
the language
of that
city), even
for non-geo
uses.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I’m
open to the
idea of a
larger group
of cities that
would have
those
privileges,
but only in
the context of
use in
connection
with that
city.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I’m
not in favor
of a general
rule based on
the
geosupremacist
idea that a
geo use is
superior to
all other
uses. I’m
really not in
favor of a
general rule
that
non-use/non-application
for geo
purposes
should get in
the way of an
application
for another
use of that
same string.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Strings
have multiple
meanings and
uses. There
is no general
rule of a
hierarchy of
rights among
legitimate
uses of that
string. There
is certainly
no hierarchy
that puts geo
uses at the
top of the
list every
time.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Greg</p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">On
Thu, May 31,
2018 at 7:54
PM Marita Moll
<<a
href="mailto:mmoll@ca.inter.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">mmoll@ca.inter.net</a>> wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt
solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm
0cm 0cm
6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<p>I know I am
a bit late in
tuning into
these thoughts
by Alexander.
But it's never
too late to
say "well
said."</p>
<p><span
style="font-family:Times,serif">I
am reminded
that, in it's
earliest days,
the Internet
itself was
considered a
public
resource. Even
the slightest
bit of
advertising
was shunned!
We have come a
long way from
there. But we
still have a
chance to
retain some of
that original
spirit. </span>The
city domain
name space
could be seen
and managed as
a resource for
public benefit
as Alexander
suggests. </p>
<p>And that
would have to
be by
design."It
doesn't happen
by accident."
<u> </u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p><span
style="font-family:Times,serif">Marita
Moll</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">On
5/22/2018
11:34 AM,
Alexander
Schubert
wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><a
name="m_6928247360478289285_m_7986622058443390664_m_1467855337704819413_m_-5000858957205867718__MailEndCompose"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Dear
Liz,</span></a></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I
am a domain
broker and
“domainer”
since 21 years
and have
consequently
analyzed the
market from
“inside” –
ESPECIALLY
when it comes
to newly
minted gTLDs.
I have
participated
in all new
gTLD
introductions
in the past,
from .info,
over .us
(liberation
in 2001), .eu
and so on. And
there is a
FUNDAMENTAL
difference
between a
historical
grown name
space like
“.com” or a
ccTLD and new
name spaces:<br>
<br>
If 10% of
names in .com
or .de are
speculative
registrations
- .com will
survive just
fine. No
problem. But:<br>
A new gTLD is
like a new
“land” – best
to be compared
with for
example Dubai.
Imagine the
rulers of
Dubai had sold
building lots
for “cost
value”; say
for US $2,000
per lot. They
would probably
have sold high
volumes – but
unlikely that
ANYTHING would
have really
being
developed
there. The
“dirt” would
have remained
what it is:
“dirt”.
Speculators
would have
speculated.<br>
But wisely the
Dubai rulers
demanded from
all land
buyers to
DEVELOP their
land – and
build
something;
“something”
that by now is
the sparkling
community we
all know:
DUBAI!<br>
<br>
In Chicago
there were
several blocks
of sub premium
land. Some
people bought
houses cheaply
– and did
NOTHING. But
others
developed the
land around –
and made the
area
“valuable”.
Guess how the
people who
bought cheap
and then
waited until
the area
became
valuable were
called? No.
Not “clever
investors”.
They were
labeled
“free-riders”.
They bought
cheap and did
nothing –
waited for the
land to
“mature” –
then sold for
prices that
were high due
to the work of
others. That’s
what “domain
investors” do:
they buy the
premium land –
let it sit for
5 to 10 years
– THEN SELL
for 1,000
times the
“investment”.
“Clever”?
Nope:
Mismanagement,
free-Riding
and damages
the
name-space:
nothing is
being
developed – no
“Sparkling
Dubai” – all
remains dirt.
Legal – but
doesn’t really
advance the
experience of
the Internet
user.<br>
<br>
It’s all a
question of
public benefit
philosophy –
or the absence
of any.<br>
<br>
Regarding
“local
business”:<br>
Yes, of course
one could
argue that a
domain
tires.denver
owned by
speculator and
operating a <a
href="http://tires.com/" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">tires.com</a>
Affiliate
website isn’t
too bad. After
all people in
Denver can buy
tires on the
website, and
the domain
owner
“invested
funds”, the
registry got
some money in
the premium
auction (e.g.
US $2k – even
if the domain
is worth US
$50k), and:
“all OK, no?”.
Free market,
and let the
registry do
what they
want.<br>
My view on
this: A city
gTLD is a
VALUABLE
RESCOURCE,
that should
aid the city
community. It
should be
MANAGED – and
ideally in a
way that
impacting
domains like
business
verticals are
supporting
LOCAL
business. The
U.S. is
CHOKING on a
gigantic
import-export
deficit: stuff
is being
bought ABROAD
instead
nationally.
The same is
true for local
communities:
The Internet
serves as a
Trojan horse
to shift local
business
outside the
city. Tires
being bought
at a <a
href="http://tires.com/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">tires.com</a> Affiliate site
displayed at
tires.denver
shift revenue
OUTSIDE
Denver.
Apartments
leased via an
Affiliate site
at
apartments.denver
destroy local
real estate
businesses.
This list goes
on and on and
on. The huge
advantage of a
locally
MANAGED city
gTLD is to
ADVANCE LOCAL
BUSINESS!
Hence
“.denver”! If
you wanted to
buy tires
SOMEWHERE –
then do it.
But the very
idea of a
.city gTLD is
that it
promotes LOCAL
BUSINESSES!
And that
doesn’t happen
by “accident”
– it has to be
promoted and
MANAGED. And
the ones who
do that best
are the local
business
constituencies
– business
associations,
chambers,
etc.!</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Imagine
somebody
bought a wood
(large
property full
of trees) for
cheap money –
and would
harvest ALL
trees, and
sell them at
once: Yes,
they would
make a profit.
Is it good for
the land? Nope
– the land
will erode.
Hence laws and
rules regulate
wood
harvesting.
It’s the same
with city
gTLDs. Selling
all the
premium
domains in
SEDO auctions
to “investors”
makes money –
and drives
registration
volume: but it
deprives the
namespace of
creating
“beacon”
domains that
serve as brand
ambassadors
for the city
gTLD.<br>
<br>
Took me a few
years to
develop all
these
thoughts. I am
thinking about
community name
spaces since
2004. I love
earning money
– but I love
even more when
I serve people
while doing
so. Not all
life is about
making cash
fast.<br>
<br>
So when a city
Government is
being
presented with
a city
constituencies
funded, owned,
managed and
marketed
“non-profit”
effort to
advance the
city – and on
the other hand
with an
operator that
merely “makes
the namespace
available”:
let the cities
representatives decide. I agree with you: ICANN should NOT “tell
applicants
where to base
their
business” or
how to operate
it. It’s fine
when there are
offshore based
portfolio
applicants
with large
amounts of VC
money running
around and
trying to
convince
cities to
operate a
valuable and
important city
infrastructure. But allow the city to decide whom they pick – don’t let
VC money
“brute force”
ownership of
city
namespaces.<br>
<br>
Btw: Sadly the
“managing”
part wasn’t
well developed
in the first
batch of city
gTLDs. I think
this will
dramatically
change in the
next round. </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Alexander</span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"> </span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt
solid
rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt
0cm 0cm">
<p
class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> Liz Williams [<a
href="mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b>
Dienstag, 22.
Mai 2018 06:39<br>
<b>To:</b>
Alexander
Schubert <a
href="mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">
<alexander@schubert.berlin></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">
gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b>
Re:
[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5]
Qualifying the
threshold for
requirement of
letters of
non-objection!</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Hello
Alexander </p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I
wanted to
explore a
little further
your assertion
that an
applicant for
a geo-TLD
should be
locally
based. Our
freedom of
expression/civil
liberties
colleagues
will have a
better handle
on those
imperatives
but I wonder
why one would
expect an
applicant to
be located in
the community
when, for
example, a
geographic
domain name
label may be a
means of
expressing
dissent or
difference
from the
current
government?
It is not a
pre-requisite
for ICANN to
be telling
applicants who
meet the
evaluation
criteria that
they should be
“local”. We
also know that
the Internet
enables us to
be wherever we
want to be to
do
business…that
is one of the
most amazing
characteristics
of the
Internet.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">It
is also not
desirable for
ICANN to tell
applicants
where they
should locate
their
businesses.
Organisations
legitimately
and perfectly
legally choose
the registered
location for
their
business based
on, for
example, tax
treatment,
ease of doing
business, rule
of law,
incentives for
entrepreneurs,
bandwidth and
timezone.
Those are all
good things we
wouldn’t want
to interfere
with.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">I
doubt that it
is supportable
to have a
prohibition on
entities
applying for
several
geographic
labels. What
if it were a
good thing
that an expert
registry
operator was
able to
provide
services to
communities in
unique and
attractive
ways? I would
have thought
that is a nice
niche business
that could
benefit
communities in
good ways? </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">And
finally, I
don’t
understand the
problem with
domain
investors.
Those domain
name owners
are legitimate
purchasers of
domain names
at the second
level. Many
registry
operators are
propped up by
those
investors and
the secondary
domain name
market is
active and
mature which
is another
indicator of
competition
and consumer
choice. I
think we can
all agree that
mis-using a
domain name,
whoever owns
it, isn’t a
desirable
market outcome
but there are
measures in
place to deal
with that.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Looking
forward to the
views of
others.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">Liz
</p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:9pt;font-family:Avenir">….<br>
Dr Liz
Williams |
International
Affairs<br>
.au Domain
Administration
Ltd<br>
M: +61 436 020
595 | +44 7824
877757<br>
E: <a
href="mailto:liz.williams@auda.org.au"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">liz.williams@auda.org.au</a> <a
href="http://www.auda.org.au/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.auda.org.au</a><br>
<br>
Important
Notice<br>
This email may
contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal
privilege, and
is
intended for
the use of the
named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must
not use,
disclose or
copy any part
of this email.
If you have
received this
email
by mistake,
please notify
the sender and
delete
this message
immediately.</span>
</p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12pt"> </p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5pt;margin-bottom:5pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal">On
20 May 2018,
at 9:40 pm,
Alexander
Schubert <<a
href="mailto:alexander@schubert.berlin" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">alexander@schubert.berlin</a>>
wrote:</p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Christopher,<br>
<br>
I completely
understand
(and support)
your notion,
that an
applicant for
a geo-gTLD
should be
locally
rooted;
ideally
geo-community
funded,
managed and
marketed. And
I am
completely in
agreement with
you that we
should create
policy that
prevents that
a few big
players are
blanketing the
geo-gTLD space
with hundreds
of
applications
each a copy
& paste
job of the
other, with
absolutely
zero knowledge
of the
specific city
community and
no intent to
further THEIR
specific
agenda –
instead trying
to make money
FAST.<br>
<br>
And obviously
letters of
non-objection
will help a
lot – because
by 2020 the
mayors of a
major cities
WILL know a
bit about the
pitfalls of
the management
for city gTLDs
(consultants
will bring
them up to
speed and help
them to
navigate the
jungle of
examining the
applicants
funding,
marketing,
community-engagement
and rooting,
management,
etc).<br>
<br>
</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-right:72pt;margin-bottom:12pt;margin-left:83.4pt"> <span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">You suggest a
measure to
reduce mass
land-grab:
“Prohibition
to apply for
several
geo-gTLDs for
the same
entity”. I was
a “domainer”
(shame on me)
since 1997,
and then
started to
create
community
based gTLDs in
2004 (.berlin
was a
community
owned, funded,
managed and
designated
gTLD
application,
as was the
.gay applicant
I founded). I
personally
know quite a
bunch of
“domainers
turned
portfolio
applicants”.
And I know
their
abilities,
their
endurance.
They will
simply have a
legal entity
in each city –
intelligently
managed
through
notaries
acting on
their behalf.
I am happy to
help looking
into policy
that is
designed to
stop geo-name
land grab; but
the measure
proposed by
you is
probably
easily to be
gamed.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Alexander<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>