[council] JAS WG charter extension motion
adrian at ausregistry.com.au
Thu Nov 18 02:01:36 UTC 2010
So sorry, but I am still not sure I understand.
See below as I have a few points of clarification.
Chief Executive Officer
AusRegistry Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian at ausregistry.com.au
The information contained in this communication is intended for the named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.
From: Rafik Dammak [mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 18 November 2010 2:09 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: Re: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion
thank you for your interest,
for clarification, an applicant won't necessary apply or/and have all kind of support.
1- it respect cost-recovery principle and we will work with the new gTLD program staff to accommodate that (Chuck amendment). We will work on topic of external sources of donors or foundations willing to support financially applicants.
AK>> So will you be proposing for a discount from ICANN? Yes or no? To be clear, by discount I mean a reduction in the total application fee paid to ICANN. It may be for example, that the applicant pays part of the fee and the rest is sourced from another means (foundation etc).
2- yes, we didn't state exceptions for applicants regarding those requirements, assistance or support can be technical (from various service providers etc) or financial ( subsidized from external sources). the WG will work to figure out how this could best be done.
AK>> The applicant will pay for Registry Services but they may be subsidised from an external party? Yes or no? Also, these Registry Services will comply with all other Registry standards as requested in the AGB? Yes or no?
3- translation of material etc but not necessarily by ICANN, again the WG will work to figure out how it can be done
as you see the WG will work to explore how things will be done (guidelines)
2010/11/17 Adrian Kinderis <adrian at ausregistry.com.au<mailto:adrian at ausregistry.com.au>>
I have been reviewing the work of the JAS WG.
It is all good work that is deserved of our attention.
However, I have read the various Board resolutions that were the genesis of the working. The original notion was developed in order to provide support to applicants.
Is it fair to say that, in your mind (or the WG’s for that matter), the following will be true given the support regime as you would have it;
- a new gTLD applicant will have to pay the application fee in its entirety but will be subsidized through a foundation or external parties?
- a new gTLD applicant will have to establish a Registry System to full and ‘standard’ ICANN compliance but may be subsidized in order to cover the costs associated?
- ICANN may provide assistance in preparing the application for those where English is not a first language
Can you clarify this for me so I can take this back to my SG? Thanks.
From: owner-council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org> [mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org<mailto:owner-council at gnso.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:01 AM
To: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion
I want to submit this motion for JAS WG charter extension in response to ICANN board resolution about supporting applicants and for completion a list of further work items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the council