[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Latest Version of Compromise Closed Generic Text

[McGrady, Paul D.]

+1 Rubens.  We can’t substitute the facts as they are with Kathy’s view of how they should be.

I too am disappointed that this WG did not reach agreement on an improvement to the status quo as the Board asked us to.  Some of us tried by introducing thoughts on what a so-called closed generic in the public interest would look like.  But, those ideas didn’t stick.  Our failure to come to an agreement doesn’t make the fact that we didn’t, somehow, “inaccurate.”  What happened, happened, and editorializing about what that means is just another way of trying to get an individual view of what the status quo is adopted by this group.  We have been over and over and over this and I, very kindly and respectfully, resist this latest attempt.

Best,
Paul





To receive regular COVID-19 updates from Taft, subscribe here<https://www.taftlaw.com/general/subscribe>. For additional resources, visit Taft's COVID-19 Resource Toolkit<https://www.taftlaw.com/general/coronavirus-covid-19-resource-toolkit>.

This message may contain information that is attorney-client privileged, attorney work product or otherwise confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, use and disclosure of this message are prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.
From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2020 3:39 PM
To: Marc Trachtenberg via Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Latest Version of Compromise Closed Generic Text




On 10 Jul 2020, at 17:15, Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>> wrote:

Hi Jeff,

I'm sorry, but the language below is not accurate, and it must be.  There is no way this group can agree to allow Closed Generics outside the public interest framework required by the GAC in its Advice. Further, absent our agreement (and the GNSO’s approval), we have not meet the requirements of the Board's resolution on Closed Generics, and the bar does not simply "time out."


The group haven't agreed on anything, so...



I offer the language below as a substitution -- to accurately reflect the two “Closed Generic” policy requirements before this WG and the GNSO --  the 2015 Board Resolution AND the GAC Advice.


No Agreement: The Working Group was unable to come to agreement on a policy that meets the GAC Advice requirements for “exclusive registry access for generic strings serving a public interest goal.”  In keeping with the requirements of the 2015 Board resolution, as clarified in the Rationale, the GNSO must “inform the Board on a regular basis with regards to the progress on the issue.” It has not done so.


“The NGPC [ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee] is also requesting that the GNSO specifically include the issue of exclusive registry access for generic strings serving a public interest goal as part of the policy work it is planning to initiate on subsequent rounds of the New gTLD Program, and inform the Board on a regular basis with regards to the progress on the issue. The President and CEO should provide the GNSO with information needed to support this request.” https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2015-06-21-en




Accordingly, in the absence of agreement by the Working Group on any new policy consistent with the GAC advice on public interest goals, the status quo is that Closed Generics would not be allowed in subsequent rounds in line the Board’s resolution. The GNSO has not formulated or approved a policy in accordance with the Board’s wishes, as stated in the Rationale, and has not reported any progress to the Board, as requested in the Rationale. Therefore, the Board’s resolution holds until such a policy is formulated and formally approved by the GNSO.

It's already known that we can't agree on what the status quo is, so retrying it one way or the other doesn't cut it.


Rubens



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20200711/af69704f/attachment.html>