<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)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
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;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
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="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Alan,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Can you explain why being able to assert an accountability mechanism would destroy the notion of the public interest closed TLD.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Remember, GAC Advice was fairly clear on this. It didn’t say that there should never be closed generic TLDs. It said “For strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal."<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Your initial proposal (minus the no appeals part) to have any public interest TLD closed generic exception is rather narrow to begin with. Must be a non-profit entity, must have a vote by Board Supermajority, etc. Justine has recommended
some additional elements on top of that with strong contractual compliance provisions…..<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am not saying I support or don’t support the proposal, but I am not sure why taking away a right to use an accountability mechanism would destroy the entire proposal?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Jeff Neuman</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Senior Vice President <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">Com Laude | Valideus</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">D: +1.703.635.7514<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">E:
</span><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0563C1"><a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Alan Greenberg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 25, 2020 5:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Mike Rodenbaugh <mike@rodenbaugh.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal re Closed Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Fine with me. But in my opinion, that means the exception for public interest TLDs will not fly and we revert to the 2012 implementation of no closed generics.<br>
<br>
Alan<br>
<br>
At 25/02/2020 04:32 PM, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">i do not believe the Board should be allowed to make any decisions that are not "appealable" per the IRP. If Claimant has proper standing and a dispute within the scope of the Bylaws definition of Dispute, then they have a valid IRP claim.
This is a very slippery slope to start to carve out Board decisions that have no chance of appeal, and why on Earth would we want to do that anyway?<br>
<br>
Mike Rodenbaugh<br>
RODENBAUGH LAW<br>
tel/fax: +1.415.738.8087<br>
<a href="http://rodenbaugh.law">http://rodenbaugh.law</a> <br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 7:08 PM Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a> > wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
I had this in my original proposal but based on individual discussions I have had I know that some people missed it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
To have the Board make a decision that is not in any way appealable will require a Bylaw change, but it is a change for which there is another precedent that will go before the Board before out report reaches them. The Auction Proceeds CCWG also will require
a similar Bylaw amendment.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Alan<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">At 24/02/2020 09:46 PM, Phil Buckingham wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Hi Justine , Alan , Anne, <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Justine , that̢۪s a great suggestion. The contrntractual compliance & monitoring needs to be much more rigorous in the next round .
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I very much support Alan̢۪s suggestion of going aheadead with new ( 2020) policy recommendations for a special use case , New TLD application category . Let̢۪s call it a Public Ic Interest TLD .
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">I am working on a proposal ( for Friday̢۪ deadline) .) . It will incorporate the evaluation and implementation issues too.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Ultimately my thoughts are we need to make policy that is so demanding , incorporating Alexander’s suggestion of a â₢€œ health warning “ that applications will not pt pass the evaluation. ICANN will
need to employ & train “ evaluation experts. There will be no come backs , no second evaluation , no appeals . Once passed the evaluation The Board would need to approve ( or reject) the application by Special resolution.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Your thoughts ? <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Phil <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Phil Buckingham <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Sent from my iPhone<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 25 Feb 2020, at 01:30, Justine Chew <<a href="mailto:justine.chew@gmail.com">justine.chew@gmail.com</a> > wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Perhaps this is something we could pick up under the Contractual Compliance topic.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Justine<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
-----<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 01:39, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>> wrote:
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Thank you Justine. This is very constructive. We would then need to think about enforcement mechanisms. Private dispute resolution process? Filing a complaint with ICANN? Positive obligation by ICANN Compliance
to monitor? Accomplish the goals below via PICs and eligibility requirements? Would appreciate your further thoughts.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Just continuing the discussion so we can help create a complete proposal as this moves forward to formulate a WG recommendation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org"> gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>> On Behalf Of Justine Chew
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 12:28 AM
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To: <a href="mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">
gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposal re Closed Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">[EXTERNAL] <o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
While I remain undecided on supporting either a full ban on closed generics or (what I call) a qualified ban per the special case conditions proposed by Alan, I strongly suggest that any consideration of Alan's proposal should also include the following:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Insertion as material in the relevant RA for a closed generic TLD that is a generic word, such terms and conditions:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">(1) to be derived from the applicant's submission on the use of the closed generic TLD as being in the public interest;
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">(2) which prohibit any action considered as anti-competitive (eg. discriminatory registration policies in favour of certain parties or against competitors in the applicable industry);
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">(3) which govern any dealings on the disposal and/or future use of the closed TLDs - that (1) and (2) must be adhered to at all times and by any party which operates or acquires the rights under the RA; and
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
(4) to stipulate that launching for SLD registration for the closed generic TLD by the (first) RO must take place within 2 years of signing the RA.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
the breach of one or more of which will constitute cause for termination of the RA.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Justine <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">-----<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 13:48, Alan Greenberg <<a href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a> > wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">While talking to a colleague today, I realized a problem with my
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">proposal. I was thinking that there would (or could ) only be a small
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">number of applications that could be deemed to be for closed TLDs
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">that are generic words and in the public interest. That may indeed be
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">true. However, there may well be MANY such applications twhere the
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">applicant beleives their use will be in the public interest, and a
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">large load of such cases going to the Board will not work.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">The change is to restrict applicants to not-for-profit entities only.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">This is in keeping with the nature of the one example that has been raised.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Note that due to the unfortunate timing of the SubPro meeting being
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">scheduled in conflict with the EPDP, I will likely not be on the SubPro call.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">To make my position clear, other than this special case I am
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">proposing, I would NOT support the delegation of closed generics.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
Alan<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">At 18/02/2020 07:43 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>The SubPro meeting today began discussing Closed Generics.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>One of my interventions was that although I was strongly opposed to
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>closed generics in the general case, I did support the concept that
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>a closed generic could be in the public interest, with the example
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>of .disaster operating by the International Red Cross as the example.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>I proposed that we allow closed generic applications, but the
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>decision on whether a particular application would move forward or
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>not would rest with the ICANN Board.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>The Board would have to agree, by an overwhelming majority (say at
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>least 90% of sitting, non-conflicted, Board members) that the TLD
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>would be in the public interest. <o:p>
</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>The decision would be final and not appealable through the ICANN
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>Reconsideration or IRP processes. This latter condition would
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>require an amendment to the ICANN Bylaws to exempt such decision
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>from the accountability measures, but this is identical to an
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>amendment being recommended by the CCWG-Auction Proceeds, so there
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>is a current precedent. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>If, despite the fact that the decision would have to be near
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>unanimous, there is still distrust of the ICANN Board in this
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>matter, the approval of such TLDs could be subject to the Empowered
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>Community Approval or Rejection Actions (also requiring a Bylaw
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>change). However, in my mind, such caution would be overkill.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>This proposal would allow a closed generic when it is clearly (in
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>the view of the Board) in the Public Interest.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">>Alan<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
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.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in">
This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message
or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying
to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org">Gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<hr>
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the
sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this
email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company
registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30
Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus
USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see
<a href="https://comlaude.com" target="_blank">www.comlaude.com</a>
</body>
</html>