[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 07 October 2019

[Justine Chew]

Aha?

The ALAC is not "just like anyone else"; it is one of several specific
Advisory Committees provided for in ICANN's Bylaws and one of 2 Advisory
Committees which were funded to file objections in the last round. This
funding to file objections is expected to continue in Subsequent Procedures
and the ALAC submits that it ought to include reasonable funding to finance
appeals as a matter of due process.

Justine
-----


On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 at 16:32, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
wrote:

> Aha.
>
> Many organizations that might conceivably want or feel entitled to launch
> an objection are underfunded. Should ICANN therefore fund any organization
> without money  "commensurate with the number of applications received"?
>
> Unless ALAC is granted a special objector role, funding should not be
> contemplated. ALAC can voice the concerns of the internet users without
> raising a formal objection. Or it could raise the money required from its
> constituents or others that share its concerns. Just like anyone else.
> Am 22.10.2019 um 07:53 schrieb Justine Chew:
>
> I now wish to relay the ALAC's response on the matter of its ability to
> file both Limited Public Interest Objections and Community Objections in
> Subsequent Procedures, as well as appeals against any DRSP decisions
> dismissing the ALAC's filed Objections. The response is as follows:
>
> The ALAC has no funding ability beyond that supplied by ICANN. It is not
> feasible for the ALAC to raise funds to finance an appeal (or objection) or
> to bear costs under a “loser pays” model if its appeal is unsuccessful.
>
> Any withholding of ICANN funding for the ALAC to file objections and/or
> appeals would be tantamount to denying ALAC the ability to fulfill its duty
> under the Bylaws as the primary organisational constituency for the voice
> and concerns of the individual Internet user.
>
> As to any contemplated limits to the number of appeals or quantum of ICANN
> funding to ALAC in light of ICANN budgetary constraints, the ALAC believes
> that its ICANN funding must be commensurate with number of applications
> received.
>
> The question of standing for the ALAC to file an objection and appeal is
> beyond the scope of the Subsequent Procedures PDP WG. It is a question for
> the ALAC to consider and the Dispute Resolution Service Provider and
> Appeals Arbiter to determine in respect of an objection and appeal,
> respectively.
>
> --
> Volker A. Greimann
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20191022/488b5def/attachment.html>