<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Can we agree on the sentiment that we <i>should</i> send some
form of instruction? This directly relates to policy development
and will ultimately come back to the GNSO Council, so we should
adopt a position, even if it is a soft one.</p>
<p>If I had to estimate, and this is personal conjecture, I would
say that we lean towards this not being a dependency. Perhaps it
is a question that should call for an expression of disagreement
in case any representative feels strongly against this. Otherwise,
we proceed with recommending it is not a dependency.<br>
</p>
<p>Best,<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 22 Aug 2023 13:24, DiBiase, Gregory
via council wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:2aba3a57ffc24e538f3c3e64ed101eef@amazon.com">
<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-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 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:"Poppins Light";}@font-face
{font-family:"Poppins SemiBold";}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}</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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Anne,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think we’re discussing what, if any,
instruction we should give to the Board in addition to the
information that 1) finalization of policy on closed generics
should not be a dependency for the next round; and 2) despite
best efforts, the facilitated dialogue on closed generics did
not reach a mutually agreed framework so this group is
wrapping up and putting together a summary of their work.<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">Greg<o:p></o:p></p>
<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> Anne ICANN
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com"><anneicanngnso@gmail.com></a> <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 21, 2023 7:10 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DiBiase, Gregory <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dibiase@amazon.com"><dibiase@amazon.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Tomslin Samme-Nlar
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mesumbeslin@gmail.com"><mesumbeslin@gmail.com></a>; Avri Doria
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:avri.doria@board.icann.org"><avri.doria@board.icann.org></a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG">COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG</a>; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:becky.burr@board.icann.org">becky.burr@board.icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL] [council] Update on Closed
Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse:collapse"
cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr style="height:15.25pt">
<td style="width:842.35pt;border:solid #ED7D31
1.5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;height:15.25pt"
width="1123" valign="top">
<p><strong><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black;background:#FFFF99">CAUTION</span></strong><span
style="color:black;background:#FFFF99">: This
email originated from outside of the organization.
Do not click links or open attachments unless you
can confirm the sender and know the content is
safe.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks Greg and Tomslin. <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Could someone please clarify the
following for the discussion on Thursday?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1. Is it being proposed that
Council will write to the Board saying Closed Generic
applications should be accepted in the next round
(subject to not moving forward in the evaluation
process unless further policy is adopted by the
Board?)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2. If Closed Generic applications
are to be accepted, is Council, in its letter to the
Board, going to clarify whether an open generic
application can be put on hold as a result of a
competing Closed Generic application for the same
string? (What happened in the 2012 round in relation
to this question?) <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thank you,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Anne Aikman-Scalese<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">GNSO Councilor <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 6:52 AM
DiBiase, Gregory <<a href="mailto:dibiase@amazon.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">dibiase@amazon.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi
Tomslin,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Good
question. My opinion is that forming a new team is
an option, but not a necessity. I am not sure we
have the bandwidth to do so (at least in the short
term).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Greg<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <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"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
council <<a
href="mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council-bounces@gnso.icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Tomslin Samme-Nlar via
council<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, August 20, 2023 2:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Anne ICANN <<a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Avri Doria <<a
href="mailto:avri.doria@board.icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">avri.doria@board.icann.org</a>>;
<a href="mailto:COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [EXTERNAL] [council]
Update on Closed Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border-collapse:collapse" cellspacing="0"
cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr style="height:15.25pt">
<td style="width:842.35pt;border:solid
#ED7D31 1.5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in
5.4pt;height:15.25pt" width="1123"
valign="top">
<p><strong><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black;background:#FFFF99">CAUTION</span></strong><span
style="color:black;background:#FFFF99">:
This email originated from outside of
the organization. Do not click links
or open attachments unless you can
confirm the sender and know the
content is safe.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Dear
all,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks
Kurt and Anne for pointing out the concerns
with the wording that we potentially could
have used in the letter to the board
regarding this issue.
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
am in agreement that the council must
intentionally be clear in the letter to the
board that (a) GNSO still doesn't have any
policy recommendation on this issue and (b)
the next round should not be delayed based
on this issue.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Regarding
the 'third alternative' that has come up,
would that mean we put a new team together
<b>now</b>, with new composition rules and a
new charter "based on the good work that has
been done to date in the facilitated
dialogue"? (We are yet to read the final
report of the group but I think the group
did a good job in exploring in-depth the
problems and possibilities of closed
generics). If the answer is yes to a new
team, does it mean that the GNSO/GAC/ALAC
leadership conclusion "that there is neither
the<br>
need nor the community bandwidth to conduct
additional work at this stage" false? (I
thought the 3 community leadership were
pretty accurate on that assertion).<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Warmly,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Tomslin
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
Thu, 17 Aug 2023 at 05:56, Anne ICANN via
council <<a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council@gnso.icann.org</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Many
thanks, Susan. This is very helpful. I
think the language stating that "any
applications" for Closed Generics "should
not proceed" is phrased in a manner which
conveys a policy opinion that such
applications should be accepted in the
next round. (It essentially defines a
status quo from 2012.) If GNSO is NOT
deciding that policy issue, (and I don't
think the Council can decide it without
further policy work), then we should be
clearer and that is why I suggested we
simply say that (1) the next round should
not be delayed based on this issue and
that (2) the Council does not believe
that the issue can be resolved by
commencing a policy process such as EPDP.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">More
importantly, I think your recitation to
Final Report language provides a
possible constructive way forward which
might be pursued in the Council''s
statement to the Board. Essentially it
says a process should involve a "clean
slate" approach with non-interested
parties. I'm pasting this below again
for further discussion and consideration
at Council:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>"The
Working Group believes that if this
issue were to be considered in future
policy work, it should also involve
experts in the areas of competition
law, public policy, and economics. In
addition, it should be performed by
those in the community that are not
associated with any past, present, or
expectations of future work in
connection with new gTLD applications
or objections to new gTLD
applications. Absent such
independence, any future work is
unlikely to result in an outcome any
different than the one achieved in
this Working Group
</b>[emphasis added]."<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">This
may make more sense as a proposed way
forward unless we just want to hear from
the Board first if they will be willing
to make policy or are declining to make
policy. It would be a real time saver
if we could get some Board Sub Pro
Caucus feedback on this issue.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks
for raising this third alternative that
comes directly from the work of Sub Pro.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Anne
Aikman-Scalese<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">GNSO
Councilor
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">NomCom
Non-Voting 2022-2024<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 8:01 AM Susan Payne
<<a
href="mailto:susan.payne@comlaude.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">susan.payne@comlaude.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Hi Anne</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">I wanted to share
some thoughts on the two issues
you raised.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Issue #1</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">I read Greg’s email
as merely addressing the concern
Kurt raised that we should not
be instructing the Board what to
do, rather than expressing some
underlying intent to endorse
accepting closed generic
applications. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Is it the use of
the wording “<b>unless and until
there is a community-developed
consensus policy in place, any
applications seeking to impose
exclusive registry access for
"generic strings" to a single
person or entity and/or that
person's or entity's
Affiliates (as defined in
Section 2.9(c) of the Registry
Agreement) should not proceed”</b>
in the original Chairs letter to
the dialogue group that you feel
implies this? My assumption
would be that this isn’t the
intent. “Should not proceed” in
the last round was ICANN-speak
for rejected or refused.
Council certainly should discuss
this, however, to be sure we are
in agreement on what is the
intent – and then the letter to
the Board can be drafted
accordingly. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">To my mind, it
would make no sense for Council
to encourage that applicants to
be permitted to apply for a
closed generic, with that
application then being placed on
indefinite hold (if that were
how one interpreted “should not
proceed”) unless and until some
policy is developed which, the
Chairs letter indicates, we may
not even be working on. If the
Board decision is that closed
generics will not be permitted
to proceed, therefore, it would
be preferable if the AGB makes
it clear to applicants that they
should not apply for a string if
that is their intent. If an
applicant nevertheless does
submit an application for what
is intended to be a closed
generic, they could be given the
option either to withdraw or to
amend their application to be
non-closed, as was the case in
2012. For the avoidance of
doubt there was a third option
in the 2012 round, to have the
application placed on hold
pending development of policy by
SubPro. No applicants selected
this option in the last round.
For the future, it might be
reasonable for applicants to
have this option if policy work
were underway, but not if it
isn’t.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Issue #2</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">I don’t believe
that Council itself has taken a
decision that it will not
proceed to develop Closed
Generic policy using an existing
GNSO policy process. No doubt
Council will discuss this next
week. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">I also do not
believe that Council is
<b>required</b> to develop a
policy. SubPro attempted to do
so and could not agree on
recommendations. The Board
invited the GNSO Council and GAC
to start the facilitated
dialogue on a workable framework
“in the interest of helping the
community make progress”. The
GAC and/or GNSO Council could
have refused to try this
approach at that point, and so
it is surely also open to either
or both to inform the Board that
we have taken this as far as we
can for now.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">If there were to be
further policy work, I think
many of us are of the view that
you cannot keep putting the same
people in a room and expecting
them to somehow come out with a
different outcome. The
community has tried to develop a
policy on this and has been
unable to do so. As was noted
at SubPro 23.1<span
style="color:#4472C4">:
</span></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="color:#4472C4"
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in"><span
lang="EN-GB">The Working Group
believes that <b>if </b>this
issue were to be considered in
future policy work, it should
also involve experts in the
areas of competition law, public
policy, and economics. In
addition, it should be performed
by those in the community that
are not associated with any
past, present, or expectations
of future work in connection
with new gTLD applications or
objections to new gTLD
applications. Absent such
independence, any future work is
unlikely to result in an outcome
any different than the one
achieved in this Working Group
[emphasis added].</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Susan</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins SemiBold""
lang="EN-GB">Susan Payne
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins
Light";color:#950734"
lang="EN-GB">Head of Legal
Policy
</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins
SemiBold"" lang="EN-GB"><br>
Com Laude<br>
</span><strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins
Light";color:#950734"
lang="EN-GB">T</span></strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins Light""
lang="EN-GB"> +44 (0) 20 7421
8250<br>
<strong><span
style="font-family:"Poppins
Light";color:#950734">Ext</span></strong>
255</span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins
SemiBold"" lang="EN-GB"><br>
<br>
</span><a
href="https://comlaude.com/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Poppins
SemiBold";text-decoration:none" lang="EN-GB"><img
style="width:.625in;height:.8541in"
id="m_6769806847364007655m_6283019426559698931m_8389036200579843776Picture_x0020_1"
src="cid:part1.3KDfn0d2.WC9fXIGn@governanceprimer.com" class=""
width="60" height="82"
border="0"></span></a><span
lang="EN-GB"><br>
<br>
<em><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Follow
us on </span></em><a
href="https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/pRkAAGVfAADw_RQA0"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><i>Linkedin</i></a><em><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> and
</span></em><a
href="https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/bhkAAGVfAADw_RQA0"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><i>YouTube</i></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
council <<a
href="mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council-bounces@gnso.icann.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Anne ICANN
via council<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 14,
2023 5:18 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DiBiase, Gregory <<a
href="mailto:dibiase@amazon.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">dibiase@amazon.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a
href="mailto:COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">COUNCIL@GNSO.ICANN.ORG</a>;
Avri Doria <<a
href="mailto:avri.doria@board.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">avri.doria@board.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [council]
Update on Closed Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Thanks Greg - The
point you make that there is
as yet no official statement
from Council to the Board on
this issue is an important
one. I think there is rough
consensus at the Council level
that we don't want the next
round to be delayed by this
issue. I think two
significant questions remain
as to the following:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Issue #1.
Whether to accept
applications for Closed
Generics in the next round
or to pause such
applications pending
future Board action or
GNSO policy development
efforts. The draft
statements put forward so
far would endorse
accepting applications and
that is also a policy
statement which
essentially defines the
"status quo" as permitting
such applications. (After
all, closed generic
applications could block
open generic applications
in that instance.) This
is tricky because the GAC
has reiterated that its
previous Closed Generic
advice is "standing
advice". Would it be a
solution for the Board to
simply accept that advice
in relation to a Closed
Generic application and
then accept applications
in the next round but
require the Applicant to
prove that the application
serves a public interest
goal without specifying
any standards that apply
for that proof? Or could
the Board say that it
cannot accept the advice
from the GAC because it
would require ICANN to
weigh the content of the
Closed Generic application
and to police the public
interest goal issue during
the term of the contract
award, meaning the
requirement of the GAC
advice is out of scope for
ICANN's mission as overly
content -related? Maybe
the Council should just
say "don't delay the next
round" and should not take
a policy position on
whether or not to accept
Closed Generic
applications when the next
round opens, i.e. leave
that to the Board to
decide that policy issue
as well?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Issue #2.
Whether the Council itself
has taken a decision that
it will not proceed to
develop Closed Generic
policy using an existing
GNSO policy process. (I
think it's possible the
Board has the authority to
request a formal policy
process - not sure whether
Council has the right to
refuse to do so.) Did the
Council already decide it
would not undertake an
existing policy process
when it authorized the
Facilitated Dialogue
process? Does the
statement need to reflect
a Council decision in this
regard and if so, does
that need a separate vote
from Council? Are we
risking delay of the next
round over the Council's
failure to act on this
policy issue? The Board
invoked the Facilitated
Dialogue process outside
normal policy development
channels but it appears
that process failed.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Any thoughts
re the above
considerations ?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Anne</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"><br
clear="all">
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">Anne
Aikman-Scalese</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">GNSO
Councilor</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">NomCom
Non-Voting
2022-2024</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">On Mon, Aug 14,
2023 at 6:51 AM DiBiase,
Gregory via council <<a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council@gnso.icann.org</a>>
wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in
0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;border-top:currentcolor;border-right:currentcolor;border-bottom:currentcolor">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi
Kurt,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">A
couple thoughts here:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<ol type="1" start="1">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l2
level1 lfo1">
We have not
communicated a
decision or feedback
to Board yet, so we
have time to discuss
our messaging (so far,
the SO/AC chairs have
sent a letter to the
dialogue participants
and the dialogue
participants have
agreed with the
letter’s sentiment). <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l2
level1 lfo1">
I think council is in
agreement that work on
closed generics cannot
be a dependency for
the next round and the
Facilitated Dialogue
on Closed Generic
gTLDs should not
continue to be the
vehicle advancing this
work (please let me
know if I’m
oversimplifying). If
this is correct, I
think we can simplify
this issue to: how or
if we should frame the
“status quo” to the
Board. More
specifically, we can
take a closer look at
this proposed language
from the letter to the
dialogue participants:
<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="2">
<ol type="a" start="1">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1
level2 lfo2">
“until there is
community-developed
policy, the Board
should maintain the
position from the
2012 round (i.e.,
any applications
seeking to impose
exclusive registry
access for "generic
strings" to a single
person or entity
and/or that person's
or entity's
Affiliates (as
defined in Section
2.9(c) of the
Registry Agreement)
should not proceed;”<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
</ol>
<ol type="1" start="3">
<li class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0
level1 lfo3">
Perhaps we should
modify this part to
say closer to: “given
that there is no
community-developed
policy on closed
generics (i.e., any
applications seeking
to impose exclusive
registry access for
"generic strings" to a
single person or
entity and/or that
person's or entity's
Affiliates (as defined
in Section 2.9(c) of
the Registry
Agreement), we
acknowledge that the
Board may not allow
closed generics to
proceed (in line with
their position from
the 20201 round) until
policy is developed.”
In other words, we
don’t need to instruct
the Board on what the
status quo is, rather,
we are informing them
that a policy on
closed generics has
not been finalized and
we recommend not
delaying the next
round until this
policy work is
completed.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I’m
sure I have point 3
wrong as I am not as
well-versed in subpro as
others, but we can
discuss further to make
sure we are all aligned.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Greg<o:p></o:p></p>
<p> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
council <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span lang="EN-US">council-bounces@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>kurt
<span lang="EN-GB"><a
href="http://kjpritz.com/" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">kjpritz.com</span></a></span>
via council<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday,
August 13, 2023 7:54
PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Paul
McGrady <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:paul@elstermcgrady.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span lang="EN-US">paul@elstermcgrady.com</span></a></span>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Avri
Doria <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:avri.doria@board.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span lang="EN-US">avri.doria@board.icann.org</span></a></span>>;
GNSO Council <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE:
[EXTERNAL] [council]
Update on Closed
Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<table
class="MsoNormalTable"
style="border-collapse:collapse" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
border="0">
<tbody>
<tr
style="height:15.25pt">
<td
style="width:842.35pt;border:solid
#ED7D31
1.5pt;padding:0in
5.4pt 0in
5.4pt;height:15.25pt"
width="1123"
valign="top">
<p><strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black;background:#FFFF99">CAUTION</span></strong><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;color:black;background:#FFFF99">: This email
originated
from outside
of the
organization.
Do not click
links or open
attachments
unless you can
confirm the
sender and
know the
content is
safe.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Replying
to Paul (Hi Paul):
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">As
pointed out by Anne
(and Rubens in a
parallel email
exchange), the
question of status
quo is not settled.
That is the reason
the SubPro working
group specifically
asked the Board to
settle the
question. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
Board essentially
created a new,
temporary policy
when it introduced
an additional
restriction into the
criteria for
delegating new TLDs.
(I say temporary
because the
restriction was
time-limited in a
way.)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
SubPro final report
does not recommend
an extension of that
restriction by way
of a “pause,” the
report specifically
recommends something
else. By
recommending a
pause, the SO/AC
leadership would be
amending the final
report
recommendation. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
wish I could be
clearer. That
somehow eludes me at
the moment. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Kurt<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On 11 Aug
2023, at 3:37
am, Anne ICANN
<<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</span></a></span>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi Kurt and
Paul,
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">As I see it,
the issue has
come back to
what
constitutes
the "status
quo". This
issue was
hotly debated
in the Sub Pro
Working
Group. Some
maintained
that there was
no prohibition
on the
applications
for Closed
Generics
because none
was contained
in the 2012
AGB. Others
maintained
that due to
the GAC Advice
and Board
direction to
"pause"
pending policy
development,
the "status
quo" is
actually a
"pause" which
would be
continued at
the start of
the next
round. The
risk I see for
the ICANN
Board in the
latter
situation is
that those
existing
applications
for Closed
Generics
(which are on
hold) as well
as any future
applications
to be taken in
the next round
(not
prohibited by
this
recommendation)
would build a
case for
Request for
Reconsideration
if the Board
does not allow
those
applications
to move
forward. For
example, the
grounds might
be Applicant
Freedom of
Expression
under the
Human Rights
Core Value and
the underlying
principle of
Applicant
Freedom of
Expression
that has been
affirmed by
subsequent PDP
work and is
now being
confirmed in
the Sub Pro
IRT process. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Another
factor is that
the Board has
consistently
declined to
make policy.
And I'm not
certain that
the GNSO
Council
actually has
the authority
to direct the
Board to make
a Closed
Generic
policy. Are
you gentlemen
certain that
this is
kosher?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Certainly I
agree this
issue should
not hold up
the next round
but of course
there is a
year to go.
If the Board
is willing to
take a
decision on
this, that is
one scenario.
If the Board
is not willing
to take a
decision on
this and/or is
concerned
about the risk
of expensive
litigation
over a
possible ban,
then that is
another
scenario. Has
anyone spoken
with our Sub
Pro Board reps
about this
approach?
(They are
copied here.)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thank you,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Anne
Aikman-Scalese<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">GNSO
Councilor
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">NomCom
Non-Voting
2022-2024<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">anneicanngnso@gmail.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On Thu, Aug
10, 2023 at
10:15 AM Paul
McGrady via
council <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border:none;border-left:solid
#CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in
0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;border-top:currentcolor;border-right:currentcolor;border-bottom:currentcolor">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Hi Kurt,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Thanks for
this. I’m not
sure I am
understanding
your concern.
One of the
basic tenants
that everyone
in the SubPro
PDP agreed to
was that,
absent any
changes
captured in
the
Recommendations,
that the
status quo
would
prevail. All
the letter
does is ask
for that. I
feel better
about sticking
with the WG’s
inability to
change the
status quo
than I do
asking the
Board to write
a policy when
the community
couldn’t agree
to anything,
even after two
valiant
efforts. We
tried in the
WG, we
couldn’t get
there, the
status quo
should
prevail. We
tried again at
the request of
the Board at
the SO/AC
level, we
couldn’t get
there, the
status quo
should
prevail. The
letter leaves
open the
possibility of
future
community work
on this but
notes there is
no bandwidth
or appetite to
do so and we
don’t want the
next round
held up. Help
me understand
you concern
about asking
the Board to
maintain the
status quo
until/if the
community
comes up with
a policy on
these. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Paul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b>From:</b>
council <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">council-bounces@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>>
<b>On Behalf
Of </b>kurt <span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="http://kjpritz.com/" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">kjpritz.com</span></a></span>
via council<br>
<b>Sent:</b>
Thursday,
August 10,
2023 3:45 AM<br>
<b>To:</b>
John McElwaine
<<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">john.mcelwaine@nelsonmullins.com</span></a></span>><br>
<b>Cc:</b>
GNSO Council
<<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>><br>
<b>Subject:</b>
Re: [council]
Update on
Closed
Generics<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">Hi
John: <br>
<br>
Thanks for
taking time to
make this
detailed
report, and
also thanks to
the
well-intentioned
people that
participated
in the effort,
in particular,
our GNSO
representatives.
I am
not surprised
by the
outcome. <br>
<br>
I am surprised
by the
recommendation
to pause any
release of
closed generics
to a future
round. Such an
action would
turn the
consensus-based policy
development
process on its
head.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">1. I
don’t
understand how
the SO/AC
leaders have
the authority
to revise the
PDP final
report
recommendation. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">The
PDP final
report
(approved by
each of the
Councillors)
stated that
the closed
generic
decision
should be left
up to the
ICANN Board.
The
final report
did
not recommend
the
conflicting
direction that
the closed
generics
ban be
continued
until a future
round.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">The
Board made an
attempt to
(re)involve
the community
by
inviting the
GAC and GNSO
to develop a
solution. With
that effort
closed, we
should revert
back to the
final report
recommendations.
We should not
change
the consensus
position
developed. Do
we think the
PDP team would
have approved
a recommendation to pause closed generics for an additional round? (No.)
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">We
have
thoroughly
discussed the
conditions
under which a
Council approved final report can be changed (e.g., GGP), and this is
not one
of them. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">2.
Continuing
the ban on
closed
generics
effectively
abandons
the consensus
policy model
of decision
making.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">The
new gTLD
policy
developments,
in 2007-8 and
2016-21 have
asked the
questions: (1)
should there
be a round of
TLDs and, if
yes, (2)
what restrictions
/
conditions should
be in place to
address SSR,
IP,
and competition
concerns.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">Restrictions
and conditions
enjoying
consensus
support
were implemented
in the
program. (An
illustrative
example is the
RPM IRT,
whose recommendations
were ratified
by the
community
STI.)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">During
discussions on
closed
generics,
there were
people
for barring
them, allowing
them, and
allowing them
with
restrictions.
Pausing
any introduction
of
closed generics
essentially
creates a
policy
advocated by
a minority
(and in any
case not
enjoying
consensus
support). The
final
report indicated
as much.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">This
result
provides an
incentive to
avoid
compromise.
Going forward,
those wanting
to implement
an unsupported
policy can
refuse
to compromise
through a PDP
and subsequent
ad-hoc
discussions
with the hope
that leadership will “give up” and implement unsupported restrictions.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">3.
The
decision to
ban closed
generics for
an additional
round contradicts the one step the Board took.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">The
Board
direction to
the GAC-GNSO
team
established
guardrails, prohibiting
a model that
would either
ban or provide
for the
unrestricted release
of closed
generics. We
cannot be sure
this is where
the Board
will land
absent input
from the
GAC-GNSO
effort, but we
should not
erase the
chance that
the Board
would develop
a balanced
decision.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt">Two
additional
points:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt"><br>
1. I do
not believe
that deferring
the issue to
the Board will
delay the next
round, despite
the recent
GAC-GNSO
detour. The
Board has more
than a year to
make a call. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt"><br>
2. I do
not believe
the Board is
exceeding
their
authority in
making the
call. The GNSO
specifically
assigned the
task to the
Board as part
of
their policy
management
responsibility.
In any event,
the Board
established
that authority
when it paused
closed
generics in
2012,
contradicting
the Council-approved policy. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt"><br>
If given the
opportunity to
participate in
a discussion
on this issue,
I would oppose
the
recommendation
that the issue
should be
paused, and
closed generics
banned for
the reasons
stated above.
I would
support the
final report
recommendation
that the issue
be decided by
the Board. </span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt"> <br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
Kurt</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On 10 Aug
2023, at 7:33
am, John
McElwaine via
council <<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Dear
Councilors,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">As GNSO
Council
liaison to the
ALAC-GAC-GNSO
Facilitated
Dialogue on
Closed Generic
gTLDs, I
wanted to
update you on
the latest
developments
on this
project. On 7
July 2023,
after
discussions
amongst
themselves
that I also
participated
in, Sebastien
(in his
capacity as
GNSO Chair),
Jonathan Zuck
(ALAC Chair)
and Nico
Caballero (GAC
Chair) sent
the attached
letter to the
participants
in the
dialogue. For
reasons set
out in the
letter, and in
response to
questions that
the dialogue
participants
had referred
to them (also
noted in the
letter), the
three Chairs
have
collectively
decided that
it will be
neither
necessary to
continue with
the dialogue
to develop a
final
framework nor
initiate
further policy
development
work on this
topic.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The dialogue
participants
have discussed
the Chairs’
joint letter
and agreed to
conclude their
work as
requested,
including
producing an
outcomes
report to
ensure that
the work to
date is
thoroughly
documented.
Participants
also agreed to
forward the
Chairs’ letter
to all the
commenters
that submitted
input on the
draft
framework
(viz., Tucows,
RySG, BC,
ISPCPC, ALAC
and GAC), and
have invited
those
commenters
that wish to
engage with
the group to
join their
next call to
clarify any
significant
concerns they
raised in the
feedback they
provided.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The staff
team that is
supporting the
dialogue is
currently
preparing a
draft outcomes
report for the
group to
review. The
group intends
for the
outcomes
report to
serve as an
introduction
and summary of
their work,
including
expressly
clarifying
that the draft
framework the
group
published in
June 2023 does
not reflect
agreed
outcomes but,
rather, was a
product of
compromise
that was
reached in the
interests of
soliciting
community
feedback on
the various
elements and
points
included in
the draft
framework. The
outcomes
report will
also include
all the
community
feedback that
were submitted
in full, links
to the group’s
community wiki
space and
other relevant
documentation,
and the
participants’
feedback on
the consensus
building
techniques and
approaches
that were used
for the
dialogue.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The group
hopes to wrap
up its work by
September, in
line with its
previous plan
to conclude
the dialogue
and final
framework by
end-Q3 2023. I
understand
that
Sebastien,
Nico and
Jonathan will
also be
sending a
separate
communication
to the ICANN
Board that
reflects the
decision they
took and, as
stated in the
letter,
expressing the
collective
view that:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">(1) closed
generic gTLDs
should not be
viewed as a
dependency for
the next
round;<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">(2) until
there is
community-developed
policy, the
Board should
maintain the
position from
the 2012 round
(i.e., any
applications
seeking to
impose
exclusive
registry
access for
"generic
strings" to a
single person
or entity
and/or that
person's or
entity's
Affiliates (as
defined in
Section 2.9(c)
of the
Registry
Agreement)
should not
proceed<b>;</b> and<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">(3) should
the community
decide in the
future to
resume the
policy
discussions,
this should be
based on the
good work that
has been done
to date in the
facilitated
dialogue.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Sebastien and
I will be
happy to
answer any
questions you
may have on
the letter,
the Chairs’
decision and
the proposed
next steps.
You may also
wish to check
in with the
representatives
that each of
your
Stakeholder
Groups
appointed to
the dialogue
for further
information. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Finally, I am
sure I speak
for all of us
when I say
that we are
very grateful
to the
dialogue
participants
and the staff
support team
for all the
hard work and
consensus
building that
resulted in a
detailed and
substantive,
if
preliminary,
draft
framework. I
also hope that
the
participants’
feedback on
the methods
and techniques
used in the
dialogue, as
well as other
lessons
learned from
the
experience,
will provide
the GNSO
Council and
community with
useful
information
that we can
put into
practice in
future policy
discussions.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">John<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;font-variant-caps:normal;text-align:start;word-spacing:0px">
<strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">Confidentiality
Notice</span></strong><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
This message
is intended
exclusively
for the
individual or
entity to
which it is
addressed.
This
communication
may contain
information
that is
proprietary,
privileged,
confidential
or otherwise
legally exempt
from
disclosure. If
you are not
the named
addressee, you
are not
authorized to
read, print,
retain, copy
or disseminate
this message
or any part of
it. If you
have received
this message
in error,
please notify
the sender
immediately
either by
phone
(800-237-2000)
or reply to
this e-mail
and delete all
copies of this
message.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><Message
from ALAC GAC
GNSO Chairs
to Closed
Generics
Facilitated
Dialogue
Participants -
FINAL - 5
August 2023
(002).pdf><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">_______________________________________________<br>
council
mailing list<br>
</span><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
</span><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council</span></a></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"><br>
<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
(</span><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</span></a></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">)
and the
website Terms
of Service (</span><span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"
lang="EN-US">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</span></a></span><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">).
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.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div
style="border:solid
#9C6500
1.0pt;padding:2.0pt
2.0pt 2.0pt
2.0pt"
id="m_6769806847364007655m_6283019426559698931m_8389036200579843776m_3446894358639417709m_-7502727125778583484footer">
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;background:#FFEB9C">
<span
style="color:black">This
email
originated
from outside
the firm.
Please use
caution.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p
class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">_______________________________________________<br>
council
mailing list<br>
<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">council@gnso.icann.org</span></a></span><br>
<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council</span></a></span><br>
<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
(<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</span></a></span>)
and the
website Terms
of Service (<span
lang="EN-GB"><a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
lang="EN-US">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</span></a></span>).
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>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">_______________________________________________<br>
council mailing list<br>
<a
href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council@gnso.icann.org</a><br>
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council</a><br>
<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"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of
Service (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span lang="EN-GB">
<hr width="100%" size="1"
align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
lang="EN-GB">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 Com Laude
Group Limited (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 is a limited company
registered in England and Wales
with company number 10689074 and
registered office at 28-30 Little
Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England. 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 6181291 and
registered office at 28-30 Little
Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN
England; Demys Limited, a company
registered in Scotland with
company number SC197176 and
registered office at 15 William
Street, South West Lane,
Edinburgh, EH3 7LL Scotland;
Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA
and Valideus USA, a corporation
incorporated in the State of
Washington and principal office
address at Suite 332, Securities
Building, 1904 Third Ave, Seattle,
WA 98101; Com Laude (Japan)
Corporation, a company registered
in Japan with company number
0100-01-190853 and registered
office at 1-3-21 Shinkawa,
Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan;
Com Laude Domain ESP S.L.U., a
company registered in Spain and
registered office address at Calle
Barcas 2, 2, Valencia, 46002,
Spain. For further information see
<a href="https://comlaude.com/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.comlaude.com</a>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">_______________________________________________<br>
council mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">council@gnso.icann.org</a><br>
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council</a><br>
<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" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a
href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
council mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:council@gnso.icann.org">council@gnso.icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council</a>
_______________________________________________
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 class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" 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.</pre>
</blockquote>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Mark W. Datysgeld [<a href="https://markwd.website">markwd.website</a>]<br>
Director at Governance Primer [<a
href="https://governanceprimer.com">governanceprimer.com</a>]<br>
ICANN GNSO Councilor</div>
</body>
</html>