<html><body><span style="font-family:Book Antiqua; color:#000; font-size:10pt;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">To follow on from Thursday’s conversation of prioritizing Community applications, I would offer the following.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Results of implementation decisions from the 2012 round resulted in all Community applications in contention being forced to endure one of the longest paths to contention resolution, regardless of how low their prioritization number was in the lottery draw. Without changes, this will absolutely happen again in subsequent procedures.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">A core reason for Community applications in contention enduring long delays en route to contention resolution was the implementation decision to hold all Community Priority Evaluations (CPE) until the entire contention set was through initial evaluation. With some contention sets having more than half a dozen applicants, or even a single applicant at the end of the prioritization queuing, this immediately forced community applicants into unexpected delays to reach resolution (CPE or otherwise). Contention sets without Community applicants did not endure the same long delays of CPE results before moving to contention resolution.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">We now know that CPE was not fully designed or ready for prime time at the start of the 2012 round (fact, not opinion), with many decisions about CPE procedures and evaluators happening well after reveal day and into the initial evaluation stage. This may have been why ICANN choose to place CPE at the end of the 2012 round, however I would like to think we are in a better place going into subsequent procedures to avoid the same mistakes.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Under the current implementation guidance, a Standard applicants choice to not be in the prioritization draw could also become a gaming tactic used to further delay Community applicants from learning the results of CPE. Are we comfortable with that?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">What is dysfunctional about this implementation decision is that it takes the longest and most expensive route for the entire contention set to reach decisions on CPE. CPE is actually the quickest way to resolve a contention set, and a positive CPE result could spare Standard applicants in the contention set any expense for initial evaluation. CPE should be at the front of the process and not at the end, which means prioritizing Community applicants during initial evaluation is important.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Concern was expressed by Paul McGrady on the call about giving priority to “so-called communities,” however if that is the concern it seems even more prudent that you get to the bottom of CPE decisions early in the process and not at the end. There is no advantage actually offered or given to anyone if a Community applicant cannot pass CPE, however it does help answer a key contention resolution question upfront before thousands of dollars are spent on the initial evaluation of Standards in the contention set, or thousands of dollars are handed over to ICANN’s litigation fund from applicants that have no chance to proceed because of a successful CPE in their contention set. Are we comfortable spending money that does not need to be spent?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">I’ve tried to look at this issue from the viewpoint of a Standard applicant as well. I would like to think that if my Standard application was in contention with a Community applicant that it would be helpful to know if they succeed in CPE before my application fee gets wasted on an initial evaluation that will have no meaning. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Having heard the concerns and comments, my suggestion would be that Community applicants in contention be prioritized during initial evaluation so that they can elect to start CPE as early as possible. This would also put a requirement on the Community applicant to commit to the CPE costs upfront in order to take part in the prioritization drawing. If their initial evaluation is successful they will immediately begin CPE. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Standard applicants could choose to delay their initial evaluation pending CPE results, or elect to proceed as per their prioritization number knowing evaluation costs against their application fee will begin to accumulate and be un-recoupable. In the event of an unsuccessful CPE, Standard applicants could elect to merge into the initial evaluation schedule in accordance with their prioritization number. This does give options to Standard applicants, but it also helps de-prioritize initial evaluations that have no urgency attached to them. Urgency does exist with Community applicants in contention because of the lengthy CPE process that still needs to follow. I will remind everyone that CPE has taken up to 9 months in the past, whereas initial evaluation was a much shorter time period.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">I also believe that this helps reduce gaming, both from applicants trying to use the community path to their advantage and those trying to derail applicants on the community path. If CPE can be resolved up front then much time, resources and money is saved, but if CPE is unsuccessful then it is at least known upfront and gives no further priority to the Community applicant on the alternative route to contention resolution.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Let’s be sure to remember that the 2012 round was made up along the way with respect to Community applicants and CPE (fact, not opinion), and it didn’t actually benefit any type of application in the end. Standard applicants in the contention set waited just as long to get resolve in contention resolution, but everyone could get some benefit (time & cost) from prioritizing Community applicants and moving CPE to a much earlier place in the proceedings.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style=""> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Thanks for hearing me out on this topic.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><span style="">Jamie<o:p></o:p></span></div><div><br></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="border-left: 2px solid blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size:10pt; color:black; font-family:verdana;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent<br>
Procedures PDP WG - 08 August 2019<br>
From: Julie Hedlund <<a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a>><br>
Date: Thu, August 08, 2019 6:09 pm<br>
To: "<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>><br>
<br>
<style>
#wmQuoteWrapper /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Wingdings; panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:"MS Gothic"; panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @font-face {font-family:"\@MS Gothic"; panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
#wmQuoteWrapper /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoNormal, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper a:link, #wmQuoteWrapper span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:#0563C1; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmQuoteWrapper a:visited, #wmQuoteWrapper span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-priority:99; color:#954F72; text-decoration:underline;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.MsoPlainText, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoPlainText, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoPlainText {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.MsoListParagraph, #wmQuoteWrapper li.MsoListParagraph, #wmQuoteWrapper div.MsoListParagraph {mso-style-priority:34; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper p.msonormal0, #wmQuoteWrapper li.msonormal0, #wmQuoteWrapper div.msonormal0 {mso-style-name:msonormal; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.PlainTextChar {mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char"; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Plain Text"; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle21 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle22 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle23 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle24 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle25 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle26 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle27 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle28 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle29 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle30 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle31 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle32 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle33 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle34 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle35 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle36 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle37 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle38 {mso-style-type:personal; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper span.EmailStyle39 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; color:windowtext;}
#wmQuoteWrapper .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; font-size:10.0pt;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
#wmQuoteWrapper div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}
#wmQuoteWrapper /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:1638461; mso-list-template-ids:-1840457242;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l0:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1 {mso-list-id:933437339; mso-list-template-ids:1848145944;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l1:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2 {mso-list-id:1276401725; mso-list-template-ids:-928634128;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l2:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3 {mso-list-id:1911891213; mso-list-template-ids:503188144;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level3 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level4 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level5 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level6 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level7 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level8 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper @list l3:level9 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;}
#wmQuoteWrapper ol {margin-bottom:0in;}
#wmQuoteWrapper ul {margin-bottom:0in;}
</style> <div class="WordSection1"> <div class="MsoPlainText">Dear Working Group members,<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText">Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 08 August 2019. <b><i>These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat,</i></b> which will be posted at: <a target="_blank" href="https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-08-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP"> https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-08-08+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP</a>. <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText">Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText">Julie<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText">Julie Hedlund, Policy Director<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText"> <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoPlainText"><b>Notes and Action Items:</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b> </b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>Actions:</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Proposal: Make priority numbers transferable between applications in an applicant portfolio:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">ACTION ITEM: See whether there is enough support to keep this as a recommendation. Christa Taylor and Paul McGrady will work on language.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Proposal: Priority processing for certain strings:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">ACTION ITEM: Explore further the proposal to have community applications be prioritized. Jamie Baxter to propose language in a separate thread.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Proposal: Prioritization of applications in the next round over those in subsequent rounds/windows:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">ACTION ITEM: Susan Payne to send the proposal to the list to see if there is support.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Proposal: Change to the applied-for string to a closely related string to avoid contention. Re-evaluation would be required. There would be possible additional costs to applicant:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">ACTION ITEM: Jeff to write up a proposal.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>Notes:</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">2. Review of summary document:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">a. Application Queuing (continued), beginning on page 2 – See: <a target="_blank" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhEcNGM/edit"> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhEcNGM/edit#</a><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Make priority numbers transferable between applications in an applicant portfolio:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- ICANN Org concern about secondary market for priority numbers<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- So you can't do this if your string is in contention.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- That sounds sensible and there is broad support for this (only Registrars and 1 individual stated they were against it).<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- See if we can find that there is enough support for this proposal. Not enough support in the comments to support or not support.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Priority numbers transferred with same owner should be fine. Should not be creating a secondary market in priority numbers.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>ACTION ITEM: See whether there is enough support to keep this as a recommendation. Christa Taylor and Paul McGrady will work on language.</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Application Queuing if there is a first-come first-serve process:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- No consensus on having a first-come, first-served, process.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Priority processing for certain strings:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Default would be to keep the default as in 2012.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Add a priority to application support applications.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Order from the 2012 round: Drawing 1: IDN applications for which a ticket had been purchased<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>● Drawing 2: Non-IDN applications for which a ticket had been purchased<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>● Drawing 3: IDN applications for which a ticket had NOT been purchased<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>● Drawing 4: Non-IDN applications for which a ticket had NOT been purchased<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Concern that portfolio applications undermine the basic commitment to enhancing competition and choice.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Evaluate community applications first since it is generally a longer cycle because of CPE. There is a larger issue about the expectation that a community application has to endure a longer application evaluation period.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Support that IDNs go first.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Do not support - As we saw from the last round, so-called community applications are quite controversial. I think AGB 2012 already gave them enough special rights.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- There was also discussion on having Applicant Support Applicants going first.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- IDNs could be treated as communities (people speaking the same language).<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- It seems to me that if CPE occurs early and that application fails CPE, it may clear the way for other applicants for that string and they will get to market sooner. It makes sense for everyone and the marketplace in general to get to CPE as early as possible.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- What about an Applicant Support applicant who needs time to raise funds if they are not eligible for AS funds?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Only heard 2 individuals supporting the new special treatment for community applications. Is that enough to keep itu alive? Seems like we could put that one to rest.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- ALAC also expressed a preference for giving community applications priority.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>ACTION ITEM: Explore further the proposal to have community applications be prioritized. Jamie Baxter to propose language in a separate thread.</b><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Prioritization of applications in the next round over those in subsequent rounds/windows:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- COMMENT: 2012 applications are out of scope for this policy process - not in the PDP Charter. The other issue is that applications made in 2012 may or may not meet the policies adopted for the next round. In addition, a determination as to what is "confusingly similar' is a matter for the String Confusion Objection, not a matter for preventing an application from being made. We can't put a "chilling effect" on new applicants. COMMENT<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- This isn’t a suggestion to change the past round.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- We still have applications from 2012 pending out there and we need to know how they will be dealt with<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- From the Valideus comment: “Although it does not expressly say so, this recomemndation should also apply to any applications from the 2012 round which remain pending - it should not be possible in a later application phase to submit an identical or confusingly similar application which takes precedence over one submitted in an earlier application phase.“<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- COMMENT @ Paul et al - Knowing how to deal with those 2012 applications does not mean there should be a ban on new applications for that same string. You could say there would be no contention set but you can't say no one can apply for that string. It violates the Principle of Applicant Freedom of Expression. That's a long term policy issue for all Subsequent Rounds. COMMENT<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Valideus: If there still something from round one unresolved, aren’t we doing a disservice to new applicants who might apply for something that might never be available.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- COMMENT: Round 2 applicants can decide whether or not they want to take the risk of applying for the same string or not. COMMENT<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>COMMENT: If policies change, the first application could fail. COMMENT<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- It should be at their own (hopefully informed) risk; you pay yer money and you take your chances.<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- It is possible to have a list (or a place to go to) to check if an application is still pending (at least we can recommend that)<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Application status is available here from the 2012 round applications: <a target="_blank" href="https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus">https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus</a><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- At the time the application window is opened, there should be a list readily available that identifies strings that are in some kind of 'pending' status.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>-- ACTION ITEM: Susan Payne to send the proposal to the list to see if there is support.<o:p></o:p></b></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">ICANN Org: WG should clarify what is meant by “must have priority over applications submitted in any subsequent rounds/application windows.” For example must all applications in a current round complete contracting prior to any application in a subsequent round being able to sign a Registry Agreement? Note that priority number is also used in other program phases to prioritize applications (i.e., contracting and RST).<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Didn’t get support for this concern.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">b. Application Change Requests (page 5) -- See: <a target="_blank" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhEcNGM/edit"> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nf8qGP9Y7OYuT0ZvxIgM1fZtNa4Kj8DyhzpmPhEcNGM/edit#</a><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Policy Goals: The framework for considering and responding to change requests should be clear, consistent, fair and predictable.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">High-Level Agreement:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Part of this is referring to the criteria that ICANN used into 2012 (in the Initial Report).<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- The change request process and criteria are here: <a target="_blank" href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/global-support/change-requests"> https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/global-support/change-requests</a><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Explanation: Is a reasonable explanation provided?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>2. Evidence that original submission was in error: Are there indicia to support an<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>assertion that the change merely corrects an error?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>3. Other third parties affected: Does the change affect other third parties<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>materially?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>4. Precedents: Is the change similar to others that have already been approved?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>Could the change lead others to request similar changes that could affect third<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>parties or result in undesirable effects on the program?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>5. Fairness to applicants: Would allowing the change be construed as fair to the<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>general community? Would disallowing the change be construed as unfair?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>6. Materiality: Would the change affect the evaluation score or require reevaluation of some or all of the application? Would the change affect string<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>contention or community priority?<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span>7. Timing: Does the timing interfere with the evaluation process in some way?<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- When drafting in relation to pending applications still outstanding from 2012, could you be sure to cover the issue of possible non-compliance of those applications with new policy adopted subsequent to 2012? (I previously suggested, as Christopher Wilkinson pointed out on <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">On this point: If it is allowed that an applicant may change the applied-for string because the original string is in a contention set, the new string should not create a new contention set or enter into another existing contention set. <o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Not sure why this should be in the high-level agreement.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- It is here because it is conditional.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Outstanding Items - New Ideas/Concerns/Divergence<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Suggested change to allow: Change to the applied-for string to a closely related string to avoid contention. Re-evaluation would be required. There would be possible additional costs to applicant:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Opposed: Risk of gaming, difficult situation for public and applicant.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- How would this not be fair? The issue if it is generic/dictionary terms.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Modify the proposal that if you are a brand owner and had a trademark and wanted to change your string with a descriptor.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Raises a lot of questions about processes. There are much more complex examples.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- ICANN Org concerns: Very careful about change requests to the applied for string in the 2012 round. If an application is allowed to change the applied for string then all the applications would need to be re-evaluated. Could create additional contention sets. Very subjective to decide what “closely related” means.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- changing to something similar will open door to the applications made with intentions of future changes … it is bad from the public being confused during the comments phase<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- COMMENT: The issue re modification in the .brand realm is that the .brand applicant may not have trademark rights in the modified string. This would have to be put out for public comment. There could be other trademark holders who might object to the modified string as confusingly similar. COMMENT<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- I agree with the general idea that Kathy has put forward. I disagree with the idea that it should be limited to brands that are “non-generic terms.”<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Trademarks are inherently non-generic in their context, so the requirement is a non-sequitor<span style="font-family:"MS Gothic"">
</span><o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- These revised string should still be subject to all the usual objection processes (not sure anyone said otherwise...).<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- If we narrow down the proposal the complications go away.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- Don't support the proposal and share the concerns raised by Jamie and Trang. I don't believe this is as simple as you make it out to be.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;">-- There may be some relevant comments to this discussion that were submitted under the topic of auctions of last resort -- there's some overlap in the two subjects and comments on them.<o:p></o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>Change to the applied-for string to a closely related string to avoid contention. Re-evaluation would be required. There would be possible additional costs to applicant:<o:p></o:p></b></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><b>ACTION ITEM: Jeff to write up a proposal.<o:p></o:p></b></div> <div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size:12pt;"><o:p> </o:p></div> </div> <hr>_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</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">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos">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.
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>