[Gnso-igo-ingo] Agenda - Reconvened IGO-INGO Protections PDP Working Group (Red Cross) - 14 December 2017 @ 18:00 UTC

Tue Dec 19 10:29:40 UTC 2017

Hi All,

My apologies for the delay in sending the notes of our meeting on the 14th
of December.

Per the agenda below, staff reviewed the deliverable example with the WG for
the eventual finite list of International Federation & National Society
names to be reserved.  As noted below, this is only to assist the WG to
create a finite list of identifiers that can be validated, reconciled and
free from errors when it eventually becomes implemented by ICANN staff
(subject to GNSO Council and Board approval).

Stephane then took the WG through the three examples he and his team first
provided in Abu Dhabi and later sent to the mailing list.  The intent of
this example was to show relevance on the variations of formal National
Society Names and the use of "Common or Usual" names.  As noted on the
mailing list from the IFRC General Counsel, National Societies are legal
entities created under national law and thus their formal name.  They are
latter on admitted as a member to the IFRC.  The use of the "Common or
Usual" name is left to the National Society itself and thus the requirement
to collaborate with the 190 National Societies to fully understand their
common or usual use.

In short, this led the WG to focus around four elements that can make up the
variations of the formal and common use names.  Do note, that no decisions
were made on this call.  Variant attributes:

1.       Formal/Official name vs. "common or usual" name - the formal name
will be supplied by the IFRC and acts as the foundation for a reconcilable
list and collaboration is required with each National Society to understand
the common or usual name(s).

a.       ACTION: WG to define either common or usual name for purposes of
documenting its use in the WG's recommendation report.

2.       Definite Articles ("the", "society") - the use of definite articles
is associated to how a National Society uses their common or usual name.
The definite article use can use both, one, or the other.

3.       Language (English + Official Language(s)) - there was discussion
about official language(s) as supplied from GAC advice versus "national
language" as determined from the original WG's recommendation.  This WG
discussed that there was not much deliberation on languages other than
English and that the original WG's intent was to match GAC advice on the use
of "Official Language(s)" and likely a mistake to document national
language.  Thus, a few National Societies might have more than one official
language.  The important element is that each language is properly
identified and can be traced backed to the English name of the respective
National Society for reconciliation purposes.

4.       Country Designation - this is also a variant form to how a National
Society uses their common or usual name.

Again, no decisions were made on this call.  This is a working draft of
elements that can form likely variants from the formal National Society
names.

Another aspect that was discussed is how are common or usual names can be
confirmed.  How can this WG confirm the validity of submissions from
National Societies for the definitive list?  What are safeguards?  Who
validates use?  How does the formula/ruleset prevent the creation of new
common names?  Possible forms of validation could be:

.         Use on website

.         mailing list

.         campaigns

.         vehicles

.         uniforms

.         logos

Stephane reinforced that the intent of identifying the most commonly used
variants by National Societies is not to develop an open ended list, but a
list that contains only the most important variants.  Therefore,
collaboration with each National Society will be crucial is developing the
finite list for reservation.  After the example as explained below in
further detail, validation may not be required.

Also of note, staff provided an update from one portion of the IRT
implementing the recommendations that did not conflict with GAC advice and
adopted by the Board.  There, a procedure is being implemented to handle
adds/deletes to the Spec 5 reservation list once the policy effective date
has been established.  The prior version only had the GAC informing ICANN
Org of any changes to RCRC, IOC and IGO full names.  Based on community
input, the procedure now includes the GNSO being advised of any proposed
changes and it will allow sufficient time to either confirm or express
concerns with the proposed change prior to implementation.  It is expected
that this procedure will be used for the RC National Society names under
discussion with this WG as well once it is passed to the IRT for
implementation.

And finally...

Next Steps:

Staff will work with the RCRC representative to develop an integrated
example of identifiers of 5 to 10 National Societies that will form the
basis of the finite list which is this group's primary deliverable.  The
intent is to merge the variant suggestions provided by Stephane with the
template supplied by staff and better understand the possible variants from
the four elements defined above.  Should the WG approve the four elements
and that the 5 to 10 examples meet the WG's criteria, then Stephane and his
team will work with the remaining 180 or so National Societies to develop
the final finite list of identifiers. 

At this point, we do not know how long it will take to compile the example
of 5 to 10 National Societies.  We hope to first populate the 5 to 10 with
National Society identifiers that have already been supplied by Stephane's
example and what exists on the Specification 5 list today.  This will then
be used to collaborate with the 5 to 10 National Societies and validate the
variation of identifiers. 

For now, we are targeting end of January 2018 for the WG to reconvene, but
it could be early February.  After collaboration on our working example, I
will communicate back to this group with a proposed date for the WG to meet
again.

In the meantime, I invite WG members who were not on the call to listen to
the recording
(https://community.icann.org/display/GWGTCT/2017-12-14+IGO+INGO+PDP+Working+
Group+on+Red+Cross+names).  Should you have questions, please send them to
the list.

Thank you for your time.

B

Berry Cobb

720.839.5735

mail at berrycobb.com

@berrycobb

From: Gnso-igo-ingo [mailto:gnso-igo-ingo-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Berry Cobb
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 09:03
To: gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Agenda - Reconvened IGO-INGO Protections PDP
Working Group (Red Cross) - 14 December 2017 @ 18:00 UTC

Dear all,

Please find below the proposed agenda for the next Working Group call
(scheduled for Wednesday 14 December at 18:00 UTC).  As a part of the agenda
review, please also review the attached files from the representatives of
the Red Cross and staff.  These were discussed at the informal session in
Abu Dhabi and we will review these again for the benefit of the entire
group.  Both are examples to facilitate discussions for defining the finite
list of identifiers to receive reservation protections as per the GNSO
Council resolution and to also develop a formula for future changes as new
National Societies are created by the IFRC.  

Attachments:

1.       rcrc_list_example.pdf - As noted in a prior email, this was created
by staff to provide a template of what the final output should look like for
the finite list of identifiers.  It in no way presupposes the final
determinations of this group.  This is based on principles from lessons
learned in implementing reservation protections for those recommendations
that were approved by the Board.  The principles are that the definitive
list be Reconcilable, Validated, and Free from Errors:

a.       Reconcilable - meaning that we clearly can articulate the 190
National Society names and their respective identifiers to be protected.
The rationale for this principle is that in implementing the identifiers
currently temporarily protected as a result of the Board resolution back in
2015, it was difficult for staff to determine whether the temporary list
matched that of the recommendation as adopted by the GNSO Council.  

b.      Validated - meaning that the definitive list is presented in a way
to easily determine that variants of official identifiers meet the criteria
of the reconvened group's recommendation (to be determined based on the
continued deliberations).  In implementing the temporary list, especially
for those Society names that only contained non-Latin identifiers, they
could not be matched back as being a part of one of the 189 (at the time)
Societies identified per the WG's original recommendation.

c.       Free from Errors - as a part of the first two principles, that the
listed identifiers are correct in their formal and usual names, especially
those where non-Latin identifiers are concerned.  In implementing the
temporary reservation list, staff was later alerted to a few errors detected
by Registry Operators.  For example, the Russian National Society name,
based on the list provided to staff, contained an error, where the generic
work of "society" was reserved and not the formal or usual name of the
National Society.

2.       ICANN mock-ups 4 December 2017.pdf -  This is an example provided
by the representatives of the Red Cross.  This is useful to help determine
what the exact definitive list could be including asked for variants of
usual names as based from formal names of the National Societies.  It will
also facilitate the development of a formula for when future National
Societies are created by the IFRC and added to the reservation list.  This
formula is critical, especially for ICANN, as to avoid misinterpretations as
to whether the new identifiers meet the exact criteria of the policy
recommendations from this group.

Session Notes from Abu Dhabi:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/2017-October/000104.html 

Agenda:

(0) Roll call, Agenda bash and SOI Updates

(1) Review final output example and mock-up example (attached PDFs)

(2) Discuss possible variants and formula to determine a finite list of
identifiers that will receive protection and formulate principles to define
the policy  

(3) Discuss next steps and possible timeline for completion of this effort

Thank you. 

B

Berry A. Cobb

720.839.5735

mail at berrycobb.com

@berrycobb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-igo-ingo/attachments/20171219/53ac9343/attachment-0001.html>