[gnso-gac-closed-generics] Closed Generics Preparation for 7 June Meeting
Greg Shatan [NARALO]
gregshatanalac at gmail.com
Wed Jun 7 18:41:59 UTC 2023
All,
I was hopeful when I started reading Sophie's proposal and not hopeful when
I finished. I did not see any compromise on the issue of public comment.
We even seem to have lost the concept of extending the time period! So we
seem to be moving backward.
Punting the issue forward to the PDP group without any guidance whatsoever
effectively obliterates the views of those who supported a second comment
period and those who were willing to compromise by landing on an extension
of the first comment period. Instead, we have the same comment period we
started with before we did any work on Closed Generics.
If we can't come up with a real compromise, I think we should put the 3
alternatives out in the preliminary framework as an area of discussion
without agreement:
1. Single comment period with no special extension
2. Single comment period with a special extension (either automatic or
as a result of an undefined trigger)
3. A second separate comment period post-Early Warnings.
I'm not going to rehash the arguments for the second comment period here.
They'v e been well-stated elsewhere. Any deference to the results of
SubPro need to be balanced against what we think is right for Closed
Generics, while noting that SubPro failed to take into account any of the
specific needs and concerns that would arise in the context of Closed
Generics. As between deference to SubPro and deference to our own work
(which very much takes into account the unique concerns raised by Closed
Generics), it is clear to me that we should (nay, must) give greater
deference to our own work.
I'm sorry I don't have a true kumbaya compromise proposal here. But absent
a compromise, we should not put forward a position that effectively
enshrines the result that one "side" wants. Perhaps the best compromise we
can come up with is to recommend a second comment period while suggesting
that the policy group should take into account the concerns raised by
having such a period. That at least puts the idea fully in front of the
community and ultimately the PDP group, without "deep-sixing" the concerns
so eloquently and extensively raised by Jeff et al. Importantly, I also
believe that this reflects the position of the majority view of the group
(before taking into account any unrequited compromises).
I look forward to talking soon and to seeing many of you in just a few days!
Greg
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 1:01 PM Nigel Hickson via gnso-gac-closed-generics <
gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org> wrote:
> Kathy and colleagues
>
> Good afternoon; with thanks to you and Sophie I think we are edging
> towards a way forward on this issue; think the two overriding objectives
> here are transparency and opportunity, the former in relation to everyone
> knowing what CG applications have been made (thus the imperative of a page
> / location / site where such are listed, and the latter in relation to a
> dedicated and distinct public consultation period;
>
> best
>
> Nigel
>
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 23:57, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at dnrc.tech> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sophie,
>>
>> I confess to being a bit confused. I don't see any language below that
>> addresses the issues raised by Greg, Alan, me, and members of the GAC.
>>
>> Quick note that it is my understanding that GAC is under no obligation to
>> follow the SubPro Working Group's recommendation that Early Warnings run at
>> the same time as Reveal Day public comments, and GAC is currently working
>> on the timing of its Early Warnings.
>>
>> I reattach our paper listing concerns, history and goals for
>> *a meaningful Closed Generics comment period. *
>>
>> Let me re-share Greg's email:
>>
>> "Please respond if you can live with this compromise. If you cannot,
>> please offer a detailed way forward.
>>
>> This also misses the mark and does not provide anything close to the
>> result being sought by a significant portion of the group. As such, I can't
>> live with this either. What is needed is not merely the possibility of the
>> hope of the potential of an extension of the initial "reveal day" triggered
>> comments period. What is needed is a firm commitment to a greater
>> opportunity to comment -- in the form of a second comment period for Closed
>> Generics, to occur after GAC Early Warnings.
>>
>>
>>> The number of Closed Generics is not really relevant to whether a second
>>> period is needed (or even the extension of the first period) -- unless we
>>> have hundreds of Closed Generics, in which case even more time may be
>>> needed. The issue is not primarily that commenting organizations need time
>>> to sort through a plethora of applications; rather, the issue is that
>>> commenting organizations will need more time than is granted to consider
>>> whether and how to comment on the one, two or a few Closed Generic
>>> applications that will be relevant to it/them, to build awareness of the
>>> relevant application(s) and get buy-in from potential participants in a
>>> comment, and then to develop, write, circulate to what might be a
>>> substantial group of co-authors, get back comments, revise, recirculate,
>>> and finalize the comments. Underlying this is a belief that comments on
>>> Closed Generics are more like to come from organizations, associations, and
>>> groups of like-minded entities based on the very nature of the Closed
>>> Generic gTLD. That is why this treatment is critical and why it is sought.
>>>
>>
>> Proposed revisions:
>>
>>
>> - Applications for closed generics gTLDs will be subject to the same
>> Public Comment period as all other gTLD applications. However, given that
>> closed generic gTLDs are uniquely impactful to the public interest
>> and to the interests of multiple entities that may identify with a string,
>> the group acknowledges there should be more time dedicated to their Public
>> Comments. The Public Comment period will supplemented by an
>> additional 60 day comment period solely for closed generic gTLD
>> application comments, to commence upon the submission of Early
>> Warnings by the GAC and its members. This does not replace ICANN’s
>> discretion to extend the Public Comment period for all applications, and
>> the 60-day extension will apply to the full length of the Public Comment
>> period (extended or otherwise).
>> - In line with Implementation Guidance 13.6 from the New gTLD
>> Subsequent Procedures Final Report
>> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf>(pg.
>> 244), this implementation should enable the public to easily identify and
>> obtain information about applications for closed generic gTLDs. The group
>> agrees that there must be a centralized space where prospective commenters
>> can go to understand the rules for closed generic gTLDs and view the
>> applications themselves.
>> - Note: In arriving at this compromise approach to Public Comment,
>> the group acknowledges the unique nature inherent to closed generic gTLDs,
>> as well as the need for sufficient time for meaningful Public Comments, and
>> the public’s need to readily find all relevant information about closed
>> generic gTLD applications."
>>
>> Best, Kathy
>> On 6/6/2023 11:03 AM, Sophie Hey wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> I have attempted to come up with possible compromise language on public
>> comments for 22.b of the Framework given the comments I saw on list the
>> other day. This language attempts to take into consideration that feedback
>> as well as:
>>
>> - SubPro
>> <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf>
>> Implementation Guidance 13.6 (p 58, 244);
>> - SubPro Recommendation 20.4 (p 91, 261) on 30-day operational public
>> comment periods for application change requests;
>> - SubPro Recommendation 28.14 (p 131, 280) on a single Public Comment;
>> - SubPro Recommendation 30.5 (p 140, 283) on GAC Early Warnings
>> running concurrently with the public comment period and the status of 30.5
>> as Pending in the Board’s Scorecard
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/scorecard-subpro-pdp-board-action-16mar23-en.pdf>
>> (p39) from 16 March 2023
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-resolutions-regular-meeting-of-the-icann-board-16-03-2023-en#section2.a>
>> ;
>> - Operational Design Assessment
>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/subpro-oda-12dec22-en.pdf>
>> section 6.2.7 (p 213) stating that the public comment period will run for
>> 90-days.
>>
>>
>>
>> Proposal:
>>
>> 22.b Applications for closed generics gTLDs must be subject to the same
>> Public Comment period as all other gTLD applications set out in SubPro
>> Final Report recommendation 28.14.
>>
>> 1. Consistent with SubPro Recommendation 20.4, change requests to
>> closed generic gTLD applications in response to public comments,
>> objections, whether formal or informal, GAC Consensus Advice, GAC Early
>> Warnings, or other comments from the GAC who will be subject to an
>> additional 30-day operational public comment period.
>> 2. In line with Implementation Guidance 13.6 from the New gTLD
>> Subsequent Procedures Final Report [gnso.icann.org]
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf__;!!PtGJab4!_6G04zuduBJlatvxO1KXVdYeKGv57RsVaOoKh3W11SOt5UF6MyWvPL2vighBwDwaI6EKwoq-W8w-Gf5bKlKhC5tZd7TIGzYhf_MMVg$>(pg.
>> 244), this implementation should enable the public to easily identify and
>> obtain information about applications for closed generic gTLDs. The group
>> agrees that there must be a centralized space where prospective commenters
>> can go to understand the rules for closed generic gTLDs and view the
>> applications themselves.
>> 3. Any policy work on closed generic gTLDs must consider whether any
>> other public comment period for closed generic gTLDs is appropriate,
>> balancing the interests of applicants who may be in contention sets with
>> Closed Generics, the applicant, and prospective commenters.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rationales:
>>
>> 22.b: We can all agree that closed generics are subject to the already
>> established public comment period.
>>
>> 22.b.i: Expressly calling out change requests for closed generic gTLD
>> applications in response to public feedback requiring a separate public
>> comment period. I think that changes to closed generic gTLD applications
>> would already be covered by 20.4, but understanding a need for detail, I
>> propose calling this out specifically.
>>
>> 22.b.ii: Making sure that there is outreach and information available to
>> the public on closed generic gTLDs. I also did not see any push back to
>> this language on list (apologies if I missed it).
>>
>> 22.b.iii: Committing to a policy discussion on an additional public
>> comment period for closed generic gTLDs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sophie
>>
>>
>>
>> Sophie Hey
>> she/her
>> Policy Advisor
>> Com Laude
>> *T* +44 (0) 20 7421 8250
>> *Ext* 252
>>
>> <https://comlaude.com/>
>>
>> *We are pleased to launch our new YouTube channel
>> <https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/bhkAAGVfAADl_RQA0>*[image: .]
>>
>> *From:* gnso-gac-closed-generics
>> <gnso-gac-closed-generics-bounces at icann.org>
>> <gnso-gac-closed-generics-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Melissa
>> Peters Allgood
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 6, 2023 1:30 PM
>> *To:* gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org
>> *Subject:* [gnso-gac-closed-generics] Closed Generics Preparation for 7
>> June Meeting
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>>
>> I wanted to level-set after our call yesterday. I’ve emphasized a final
>> push this week to get through your remaining work to ensure this group has
>> the best opportunity possible to share a draft framework before the public
>> sessions at ICANN77.
>>
>>
>>
>> At the end of our call, we discussed that staff would take inputs on Closed
>> Generics Framework v4 – Edits Tracked
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nEy2mQm01ITo-ovxgIVQ0kNIpLqPV4bqVxTKgZb15vQ/edit>forward.
>> Staff has incorporated many of your suggestions and these are reflected in
>> yellow highlight in the v4 – Edits Tracked document. A few comments remain
>> in the v4 – Edits Tracked document and will be considered by the group on
>> our 7 June call.
>>
>>
>>
>> To see the outcomes of your work in context, staff has compiled a Draft
>> Framework for Closed Generic gTLDs
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZzjEiWbdkqOYbzoOPglwAn30qUUNRhjP8RmgKyTlgfQ/edit>
>> that includes the edits discussed above, as well as an Executive Summary
>> and annex of supporting reference material. Please note, 22.b of the
>> Draft Framework for Closed Generic gTLDs is holding for the outputs of
>> your red line discussion of Public Comment.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please review the Draft Framework for Closed Generic gTLDs in preparation
>> for our 7 June call, as this is the complete draft framework, absent the
>> Public Comment issue and a few outstanding points raised in the v4 – Edits
>> Tracked document.
>>
>>
>>
>> Agenda for 7 June:
>>
>> 1. Complete discussion of the Public Comment red line topic
>> 2. Review remaining comments in v4 – Edits Tracked
>> 3. Go/No Go decision on the Draft Framework
>> 4. ICANN77 Public Session planning
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for your continued efforts to collaborate and compromise.
>>
>>
>>
>> Melissa
>> ------------------------------
>> 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 www.comlaude.com
>> <https://comlaude.com/>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-gac-closed-generics mailing listgnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-gac-closed-generics
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
>>
>> --
>> Kathy Kleiman
>> President, Domain Name Rights Coalition
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-gac-closed-generics mailing list
>> gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-gac-closed-generics
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
>> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-gac-closed-generics mailing list
> gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-gac-closed-generics
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
--
*Greg Shatan*
*Chair, NARALO*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-gac-closed-generics/attachments/20230607/dd9b1d7b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18901 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-gac-closed-generics/attachments/20230607/dd9b1d7b/image001-0001.png>
More information about the gnso-gac-closed-generics
mailing list