[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments

Thu Jun 28 23:01:22 UTC 2018

Assuming for sake of discussion that a population based list of "cities" is
useful, identifying a "credible" and accurate database for all the "cities"
of the world should not be assumed to be easy. The database cited,
http://worldpopulationreview.com/, does not bear strong evidence of
"credibility."  There is no informatoin about the person or entity who runs
it. A WHOIS search on ICANN's WHOIS page revealed only "ICANN received a
Timeout while querying the Registry or Registrar’s WHOIS Server."  Using
their address to look at Google StreetView shows a small office park of
one-story buildiings in Walnut, California, a suburb of Los Angeles (also
the name of a nut, a tree and a type of wood popular in cabinetry).  There
is no indication that the entity or person is there.  The privacy policy
reveals that someone named Shane has an email address there.  The Terms may
be "lifted" from another site, as they mention Pennsylvania as the choice
of law for the terms, even though the entity has a California address.
(Unlike Delaware or New York, Pennsylvania is not a likely choice of law
for a non-resident.)

The list of cities found at the link "US Cities" on the home page is "only"
100 cities long, although the introduction notes: The United States
<http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/united-states-population/> Census
designates populated regions of the country as 'incorporated places.' An
incorporated place in the United States includes cities, towns, villages
and municipalities, among other designations. As of 2015, there are over
300 incorporated places in the United States that have a population that
exceeds 100,000, which is a pretty sizable increase over the 285 recorded
in 2012.
<http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-thomas/2012/08/number-of-cities-with-six-figure.html>

I note that this list is missing the "town" of Hempstead, NY, population
700,000+, even though it goes down almost to 200,000.  The criteria of the
list this list came from is unknown; presumably, their criteria excluded
Hempstead, NY.  How many other errors there are I do not know.

>From the United States page, there is a link to a different list of city
pages, that goes down to 90,000 (still no Hempstead).  This list includes
each of the fie boroughs of New York City, which are just parts of New York
City, not "cities" at all.  It also lists some New York City neighborhoods
like Harlem and East Flatbush, and L.A. neighborhoods like Koreatown, which
are even less defined.  It does not however list Greenwich Village, my
neighborhood, even though multiple sources place it's population at
160,000+, well over the cut-off for the list.

I could go on but I won't.

Greg

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Marita Moll <mmoll at ca.inter.net> wrote:

> In answer to your question, Alexander, would cities in Ontario (under
> normal circumstances) have to solicit support from the province  --  no, I
> doubt that very much, and I can't see the federal government meddling in
> there either. I was merely illustrating that things are always in a state
> of flux -- and whatever system we set up has to take that into account as
> well. Laws change, cities change, populations move around. Currently,
> people are exiting large cities in war-torn countries in the Middle East
> and elsewhere. Populations go down as well as up.
>
> So, to your simple, transparent and fair measure to identify cities, I
> would suggest we keep these things in mind and try to build in some
> flexibility as well. At least, with a population measure, a list based on
> credible statistics could maintained in the same way as the country code
> list is maintained and amended through a policy process as is now the case
> with changes to country names.
>
> Credible databases do exist. The following site *World Population Review*
> is full of information about city populations by country with data sourced
> through the U.N. Some historical info as well.
>
> worldpopulationreview.com
>
> Marita
>
> On 6/28/2018 2:41 PM, Alexander Schubert wrote:
>
> Hi Marita,
>
> if someone applied for a Canadian city, they had to solicit the support
> from the province as well? I assume only from the city Government. I just
> wanted to point out that the “letter of non-objection” (“Government
> support”) DOES NOT provide “Governments” (of countries) with “veto rights”.
> In opposite: Often city Governments are VEHEMENTLY opposed to their federal
> Governments – e.g. in the birth land of the Internet! Some U.S.  cities are
> even completely denying followership and orders of federal authorities (for
> example “sanctuary cities” are denying to cooperate with ICE raids). City
> governments are very local, elected by the local constituents and truly
> representing the LOCAL interests – often AGAINST the national government!
> Nobody can claim that we would “empower GAC” (or nation states) when we
> require a letter of non-objection for city name applications. That’s just
> not the case – rather the opposite. Now there might be a few totalitarian
> nations where the central Government might want to weigh in. But those
> should be few; and that’s a structural problem of THAT nation.
>
> But I certainly agree: We need a simply, transparent and fair measure to
> identify cities that require protections identical to capital cities.
> Population size is such measure. A mix of absolute and relative to the
> countries population seems sufficient and fair. If somebody had a database
> of some 100+ countries, their populations, the biggest cities, and the city
> populations, and could run a few numbers: that would help us identifying
> how many cities we would protect! Say if the absolute number was 250,000
> inhabitants, and the relative population size 2.5% (of the country’s
> population):  Latvia has 2 Million people, 2.5% equals 50,000 people. That
> would protect a mere 4 big cities (outside the capital Riga); but ONLY the
> capital would otherwise make the 250k threshold.  Would be cool to see a
> list compiled from those measures – and maybe run it against a dictionary
> and a list of important brands (not a TM database – EVERYTHING is
> trademarked, but TMs aren’t “brands”). My assumption: there is a minimal
> overlap – neither “real brands” nor generic terms would be exposed to extra
> burdens! But the cities would be protected from vultures and fake “non-geo
> use” applications! It would be a simple rule that is easy to understand and
> easy to apply. Applicants simply look up their string in Wikipedia (DON’T
> TEACH ME ABOUT WIKIPEDIA), if a city pops up they look up the population
> size of the city (cities) and the nation(s) it is in – if it meets the
> criteria they need to talk to the city – or cities in the rare case several
> make the cut! The same is true if a SMALL city wants to apply but there was
> a BIG city with identical name: Get their OK and you are fine!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marita Moll
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 28, 2018 8:21 PM
> *To:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org >> Icann Gnso Newgtld Wg Wt5
> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP:
> Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
> That's right -- although in some areas, one might also have to deal with
> one level up -- which in Canada are the provinces. If a province wanted to
> change the name of a city, here in Ontario,Canada, the city has to comply.
> Things are always changing.  In 1998, the province forced an amalgamation
> which created Metro Toronto out of  the regional municipality of *Metropolitan
> Toronto* and its six constituent municipalities. As part of this, East
> York, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, York, and the City of *Toronto*
> (1834) were dissolved by an act of the Government of Ontario.
>
> This happens with countries as well of course (USSR), but it will happen
> much more frequently with cities. That's another reason to go with a size
> definition with a few other options for smaller states and perhaps some
> leeway for historical reasons. The larger the city, the more stable the
> name. I have no evidence of that, but it seems to make sense.
>
> Marita
>
>
>
> On 6/28/2018 10:11 AM, Alexander Schubert wrote:
>
> Dear Group,
>
> We are always talking about “Government Support” – and many here share a
> healthy distain for “Governments” (especially “Federal Governments”). But
> an applicant for a non-capital city doesn’t need the support by the
> “federal government” of the respective nation; it is the CITY GOVERNMENT
> that decides! These are city constituent based city representatives! They
> know their city best!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Paul Rosenzweig
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 28, 2018 1:27 AM
> *To:* Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch; gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP:
> Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
> No, I didn’t overlook that.  It just transfers the burden to someone else
> and either makes ICANN the judge of ambiguity or makes ambiguity the
> rule.
>
>
>
> And, no, this is not an easy task … I’m glad you think it is … so I invite
> the Swiss government to do it for the world :0)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
>
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
>
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
>
> My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=
> 0x9A830097CA066684
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:31 PM
> *To:* paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com; gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Subject:* AW: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP:
> Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
> Dear Paul
>
> You may overlooked that I suggested that this information may be assembled
> by ICANN and offered to potential applicants through e.g. an advisory panel
> – see points (3) and (4) I proposed at the beginning…
>
> In the age of big data that should be simple.
>
> sorry if I did not express this with absolute clarity…
>
> Best
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
> *Von:* Paul Rosenzweig [mailto:paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> <paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com>]
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2018 16:26
> *An:* Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch>;
> gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Betreff:* RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP:
> Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
> I’m not sure that can work – now an applicant would have to be familiar
> with the law of 190+ nations to determine which are “cities” and which are
> not and therefore which need to pre-clear the application and which don’t.
>
>
>
> ICANN is an international organization.  It works because it relies on
> international standards.  If there is an international standard on what
> defines a city, that’s a plausible ground (though I would disagree with it
> in substance).  The idea that an applicant needs to know Swiss law and
> Bhutanese law and Kazahk law on defining cities is simply not realistic.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650
>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Jorge.Cancio at bakom.admin.ch
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 26, 2018 6:17 PM
> *To:* gregshatanipc at gmail.com
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP:
> Work Track 5 Comments
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing listGnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180628/2292cc52/attachment-0001.html>