<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<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:"MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
@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:"\@MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.gmaildefault
{mso-style-name:gmail_default;}
p.gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext, li.gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext, div.gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext
{mso-style-name:gmail-m_-4996287310925553571msoplaintext;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.E-MailFormatvorlage20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 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]-->
</head>
<body lang="DE" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Dear All,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">I also posted my proposed edits relating to the geoTLD.group comment in the Google doc,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">kind regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Katrin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">DOTZON GmbH - digital identities for tomorrow<br>
Akazienstrasse 28<br>
10823 Berlin<br>
Deutschland - Germany<br>
Tel: +49 30 49802722<br>
Fax: +49 30 49802727<br>
Mobile: +49 173 2019240<br>
<a href="mailto:ohlmer@dotzon.consulting">ohlmer@dotzon.consulting</a><br>
<a href="http://www.dotzon.consulting/">www.dotzon.consulting</a></span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Besuchen Sie uns auf
<a href="https://de.linkedin.com/company/dotzon-gmbh">LinkedIn</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><br>
DOTZON GmbH<br>
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 118598<br>
Geschäftsführer: Katrin Ohlmer<br>
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Akazienstrasse 28, 10823 Berlin</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Von:</b> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org>
<b>Im Auftrag von </b>Justine Chew<br>
<b>Gesendet:</b> Mittwoch, 24. Juli 2019 14:54<br>
<b>An:</b> Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>; Emily Barabas <emily.barabas@icann.org>; Martin Sutton <martin@brandregistrygroup.org><br>
<b>Cc:</b> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org<br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Notes & Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5 - 24 July 2019<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Dear Martin, Julie and Emily,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">RE: Preventative and curative mechanisms (e3): </span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">-- The comment from the geoTLD.group supports additional preventative measures (second bullet).
<span style="color:blue">ALAC also?</span> <b> ACTION: Staff will check.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Please note that I have posted within the Googledoc on page 28, my proposed edits and explanation to the point I raised on e3 with respect to ALAC's comments .<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<span class="gmaildefault"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Kind regards,</span></span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><br>
Justine </span><br>
-----<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 20:41, Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Dear Work Track 5 members,</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Please see below the action items and notes from the Work Track 5 meeting on 24 July 2019. <i>These high-level notes are designed to help WT5 members navigate through
the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted on the wiki at:
<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-07-24+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP+Work+Track+5" target="_blank">
https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-07-24+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP+Work+Track+5</a>.
</i></span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Kind regards,</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Julie</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Julie Hedlund, Policy Director</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="gmail-m-4996287310925553571msoplaintext"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:12.0pt">Notes and Action Items:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span lang="EN-US">Actions:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">Preventative and curative mechanisms (e3): The comment from the geoTLD.group supports additional preventative measures (second bullet). ALAC also?
<b> ACTION ITEM: Staff will check.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span lang="EN-US">Notes:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">2. Languages and Translations:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">Proposal: UN languages + official languages and/or + de facto official languages<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question: On what basis is this proposal being made? Why include UN languages as these have no relevance to the country? Answer: Generally the main thrust
of this proposal is to the available delegations from the current requirements in the current AGB (restricted now to all languages). The group did not have any preliminary recommendations for languages. The Initial Report just opened it up as a question.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question: In the spirit of compromise, could we have a discussion around national official languages?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question: Did the requirement for all languages cause a problem in the previous round? Answer: We have WT5 members who have been concerned about the current
limits on delegation. But not sure that we’ve seen evidence of actual problems. It may have prevented someone from applying as it may have prevented delegation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question to WT5 members: Do you think it’s practical to have restrictions on the basis of 7.5K languages?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Countries could be asked to nominate their national languages, just as the Red Cross was recently asked to identify the various names of its worldwide National
Societies.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- We discussed this proposal a few calls back, and came to the conclusion that not all countries will provide feedback on such a request. So it will likely lead
to an incomplete list.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- ICANN refused to provide applicants/operators a definitive list of country and territory names covered by spec 5. I can’t see how they would agree to provide
a list of 7,000 official languages.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Strongly support limitation here to narrow the AGB. A restriction on 7000+ languages does not support consumer choice or competition<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Still don't see the need to "fix" something that has not been a problem, especially since country names (unlike capital/city names, are unique.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Unfortunately, country names are not unique. Consider the multiple "guinea" examples</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US">.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- One objective is to make this more workable for applicants.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- This proposal is random. Don’t see the justification.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Question: What if a country nominated languages that it was de facto official? The idea of the country deciding what is relevant?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Another proposal has been UN + Portuguese + German -- or to have a clear list.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Predictability is a goal.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Or could have UN + Portuguese and others in the “top 10” of widely spoken languages in the world.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Don't believe that restricting on any existing language helps applicants who may not be aware of obscure or little used languages. This could have a distinct
chilling effect on applications, and cause the rejection of applications for reasons that an applicant could not have reasonably foreseen.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Picking a number is adding randomness.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Problem with any restricted list, is that - as I gather from the discussion - that any other translation would NOT be protected. That would not be acceptable.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- It is predictable for applicants, which is what we want to achieve.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- In the spirit of moving forward and reaching agreeable compromise, on the earlier point of languages, some of my concerns are alleviated if we can justify
this on the basis that this gives applicants and evaluators certainty -- referring to the 6 UN languages.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">3. Additional categories of terms not included in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- When we look at the comments there is a portion of the community that reluctantly accepted parts of the 2012 AGB, but were resistant to including new ad hoc
restrictions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Need to understand the rationale for any additional restrictions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Don't have anything in writing but something that would prevent the repeat of .amazon would be good to consider.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- The Final Report should also provide a clearly articulated rationale for any changes or new recommendations.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US">so
there is no misunderstanding or confusion as to the intention behind the recommendation/change.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- The debate was about the .amazon case and if we were able to come up with a list to avoid this scenario.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Could reverse the burden of proof that all geographical names could be restricted until they are approved.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- What do people mean by avoiding the .amazon scenario? To some it could mean that it should have been unavailable, to others that it should have been allowed.
There are diverse opinions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Helpful if you can use a third-party authority to determine restrictions/non-objection or support.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- The scenario is that there are countries which consider some terms being relevant geo terms and how to protect them,
</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US">beyond their country and capital city name.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Having a list with strings that cover .amazon and have them treated as geographic names attracting preventative protection.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US">*cover
strings like .amazon.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- How does that reconcile with the public comment responses?</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Need clear lists/authority. Some examples: International placenames - published lists and web searches, United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names
- list of searchable geographical names databases, American Name Society - list of international resources for names (including placenames), Geonames, Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names Online.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- There is bound to be opposing opinions in answer to your question. But on the basis that .amazon has been a problem, I think it raises a question that begs
resolution.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- The discussion around this topic has been articulated by many community members, also in the public comments.</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- One option is to give governments the option to support/non-object to anything that could be a geographic name.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Some places are across several country and government jurisdictions as well</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US">.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- No precedent that we can rely on. Many different opinions on ways to resolve this. Don’t see any clear options.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">4. Substantive review of comments in response to Initial Report questions e1-e5:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">See the questions and all related comments in the Public Comment review tool:
<a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WKSC_pPBviCnbHxW171ZIp4CzuhQXRCV1NR2ruagrxs/edit?pli=1#gid=543808477" target="_blank">
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WKSC_pPBviCnbHxW171ZIp4CzuhQXRCV1NR2ruagrxs/edit?pli=1#gid=543808477</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span lang="EN-US">Feedback on experiences from the 2012 round (Initial Report question e1):</span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Reminder: The purpose of this exercise is to determine if any of the comments impact the WT’s overall thinking about its approach to preliminary recommendations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Some of these comments are in direct conflict with certain preliminary recommendations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span lang="EN-US"> </span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span lang="EN-US">Preventative and curative mechanisms (e3): </span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- The comment from the geoTLD.group supports additional preventative measures (second bullet). ALAC also?
<b> ACTION: Staff will check.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Didn’t discuss curative measures in previous discussions. Do we deal with some things preventively and some things curatively? Could this help with the deadlock
on non-AGB terms? And I mean this should be considered beyond just languages, but more broadly in our recommendations where we are having difficulty finding compromise on purely preventative measures.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Sounds interesting but does that solve predictability issues?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- Preventative measures add to predictability while curative measures can lead to uncertainty for applicants.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">-- At least it provides more initial predictability to the applicant that outright rejection follows preventative. There's never going to be certainty/predictability
in anything that might be subject of a later legal dispute (whether UDRP, URS, litigation, WTO dispute, etc).</span><span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span lang="EN-US"> </span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><i><span lang="EN-US">Proposed principles to guide policy development (e4) -- Start on the next call.</span></i><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org" target="_blank">Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>