[Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments

[Jim Prendergast]

Jeff could you clarify

Is ICANN pulling together a digest of comments for people to read that is less migraine inducing than that google spreadsheet?  That was impossible to decipher.

On Oct 1, 2020, at 9:55 AM, Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin> wrote:


Hi,

ICANN Org states:

ICANN org seeks clarity on whether the PDP WG intends for the maintenance of the
2012 AGB provisions contained in section 2.2.1.4.2. as a policy or if this is intended to be
a Recommendation to maintain the implementation effort that was done through the
AGB. If the later, can the PDP WG provide additional guidance on some issues that arose
during the 2012 round, such as understanding the definition of "relevant governments
or public authorities" (at city, state, country and continent level) and the impact that
geopolitical changes within a region might have on what qualifies as the "relevant
governments or public authorities" during the application processing period? Will the
applicant be required to provide new documents of support or non-objection from new
"relevant governments or public authorities"?


My gut feeling is that most geo names will be city names. I called several times for a support letter tailor-made for city governments. When should that happen? Is that Staff (implementation) action or WG action? If I provide the current letter to a U.S. mayor: their eyes will bulge. The current draft letter is absolutely not suitable for city strings.


Thanks,

Alexander



From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Karen Lentz
Sent: Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2020 03:21
To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] FW: ICANN Org SubPro comments

Dear all,

Forwarding for your information the input from ICANN org to the draft Final Report.  We have also submitted this for addition into the comment tool being used for this comment forum.

Best regards,
Karen


From: Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart at icann.org<mailto:theresa.swinehart at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 5:10 PM
To: "jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>" <jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>>, "langdonorr at gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr at gmail.com>" <langdonorr at gmail.com<mailto:langdonorr at gmail.com>>
Cc: Goran Marby <goran.marby at icann.org<mailto:goran.marby at icann.org>>, Karen Lentz <karen.lentz at icann.org<mailto:karen.lentz at icann.org>>, David Olive <david.olive at icann.org<mailto:david.olive at icann.org>>, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org<mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>>
Subject: ICANN Org SubPro comments

Dear Cheryl and Jeff,

Please find the attached letter and submission from ICANN org regarding the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group Draft final report.

I hope you and your families are well.

Kind regards,

Theresa


_______________________________________________
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/20201001/937a2f27/attachment.html>