[Gnso-newgtld-wg] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG Consensus Call - Closes Friday, 08 January 2021 at 23:59 UTC

[Mike Rodenbaugh]

I also oppose 35.4, and support Paul McGrady's and Sophie's comments about
it.  No problem was ever identified to support such a drastic and foolish
change to the program.

[image: Logo]

Mike Rodenbaugh

address:

548 Market Street, Box 55819

San Francisco, CA 94104

email:

mike at rodenbaugh.com

phone:

+1 (415) 738-8087


On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 12:13 PM Sophie Hey <sophie.hey at comlaude.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> First, I want to echo the thanks to ICANN Staff and the working group
> leadership team for their work throughout this PDP – seen and unseen.
>
>
>
> Second, unless otherwise stated, I support all recommendations in the
> spirit of compromise and consensus building, regardless of my own personal
> views.
>
>
>
> I do not support 35.4 on the timing of submitting a sealed bid for
> Auctions of Last Resort. I have a number of concerns about asking
> applicants to submit their valuation of a string so early in the process,
> without being able to take into consideration
>
>    - the outcome of objection processes (particularly GAC Advice and
>    Legal Rights Objections);
>    - who the other applicants for the string are; and
>    - the alternative business models for the string (for example,
>    proposed rights protection mechanisms, eligibility restrictions).
>
>
>
> These concerns are exacerbated for dotBrand applicants as brand owners
> will be required to
>
>    - Essentially provide a valuation of the brand to ICANN;
>    - This valuation being irrelevant *if* objections or negotiations are
>    successful (ie they have provided sensitive business information for no
>    reason);
>    - Not being able to provide a bid based on who else has applied for
>    the string and the level of risk to their brand associated with the other
>    applicants and/or their business model;
>    - Having to secure internal approval for significant additional
>    funding for their application right from the start of the process.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Sophie Hey*
>
> Policy Advisor
>
> *Com Laude | Valideus *D: +44 7535530404
> E: sophie.hey at comlaude.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org> *On Behalf Of
> *McGrady, Paul D.
> *Sent:* 08 January 2021 19:54
> *To:* Martin Sutton <martin at brandregistrygroup.org>; Emily Barabas <
> emily.barabas at icann.org>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG
> Consensus Call - Closes Friday, 08 January 2021 at 23:59 UTC
>
>
>
> Hi Emily,
>
>
>
> Thank you to you and your other fabulous staff members for all of your
> hard work keeping us on task!
>
>
>
> Like Kurt and Martin, I too cannot support the proposed Recommendation
> 35.4 requiring sealed bids.  Policy making within PDPs is supposed to be
> fact based.  This recommendation appears to be simply a preference by a
> small group of ICANN insiders.  No problem was ever identified and this
> proposed solution to the non-problem has never been studied to see if it
> would fix the problem which no one, in over four years, has located.  This
> is simply not fact based policy development and the recommendation should
> have never made it into this final report in the first place.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, the proposed solution without a problem has created
> significant problems including what appears to be a significant, and
> unnecessary, barrier to entry for new .brand applicants.  In fact, the
> proposed recommendation seems tailor-made to exclude .brands from the New
> gTLD Program as it requires .brand applicants to participate in blind
> bidding, which cannot be increased, with no information about (1) who the
> other applicants are, (2) how those other applicants intend to use the TLD,
> and (3) whether or not the other applicants have put forward any Voluntary
> Registry Commitments to ensure that the TLD will not be used in conjunction
> with any goods or services that the .Brand applicant trades in.
> Additionally, it requires blind bids to be put in prior to the completion
> of prior rights objections, rendering that flawed objections process even
> more impotent. As a result, I ask that all of Recommendation 35.4 be marked
> as “No Consensus” which will allow the default 2012 ascending bids
> mechanism to remain in place.
>
>
>
> On a happier note, I am very pleased with the Work Track 5/Geo Term
> outcomes as well as the outcomes on PICs/RVCs and wanted to put in a
> special affirmation of those.  Thanks!
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *Taft *
> */ *
> *Paul* *D. McGrady* / Partner
> Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
> 111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2800
> Chicago, Illinois 60601-3713
> Tel: 312.527.4000 • Fax: 312.754.2354
> Direct: 312.836.4094 • Cell: 312.882.5020
> *www.taftlaw.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.taftlaw.com__;!!Hj9Y_P0nvg!FNKvIEyshxhz3HHt072eH_iNwf79nKyqakxZB8jZqCzWoJXy0UjuwXRsWIr4nb8vSQvjbbMwoQ$> *
> / PMcGrady at taftlaw.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
> *Martin Sutton
> *Sent:* Friday, January 8, 2021 1:17 PM
> *To:* Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG
> Consensus Call - Closes Friday, 08 January 2021 at 23:59 UTC
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL MESSAGE]
>
> Dear Emily,
>
>
>
> Thank you and the rest of the team supporting this working group for your
> efforts to bring us to the consensus call; it’s been quite a journey.
>
>
>
> Appreciating all of the discussions and community input that have led us
> to this point, which include many compromises, there is one specific
> recommendation I am unable to support. This is *Recommendation 35.4*,
> which recommends the use of sealed bids; something which remains a major
> concern, especially for dotBrand applicants, and will discourage
> applications. Please refer to the comments submitted during the Public
> Comments for the draft Final Report for specific details.
>
>
>
> Please accept this response in my personal capacity and on behalf of the
> Brand Registry Group.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> *Martin Sutton*
>
> Executive Director
>
> Brand Registry Group
>
>
>
> The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely
> for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not
> the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message
> has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by
> reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
> dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is
> strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
> On 22 Dec 2020, at 16:29, Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear WG members,
>
>
>
> On behalf of the WG Co-Chairs, and as discussed during the WG meeting on
> Thursday, 17 December, this email is to notify you of the *opening of the
> online Consensus Call on the WGOutputs *(i.e., Affirmation, Affirmation
> with Modification, Recommendation, Implementation Guidance, and No
> Agreement) of the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures GNSO Policy Development
> Process (PDP). Pursuant to the content freeze on 18 December, please see
> the attached PDF of the Outputs and contextual language, which has
> received a handful of non-substantive updates (for a redline version that
> shows the minor edits made since 18 December, please see the wiki
> <https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/h.+Final+Report+Drafting>). WG
> members who wish to familiarize themselves with the steps involved and the
> various levels of consensus applicable to GNSO PDP recommendations can
> refer to the recording of the 17 December meeting
> <https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2020-12-17+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP>
>  where the Consensus Call process was described.
>
>
>
> This Consensus Call opens *today, Tuesday, 22 December 2020 and closes on
> Friday, 08 January 2021 at 23:59 UTC*.  Per the GNSO Working Group
> Guidelines [gnso.icann.org]
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-24oct19-en.pdf__;!!PtGJab4!rNJ7mR-y3NiOaoAVdoJAaixwM1dqZ9IzY_6ZGh-d2rURZLU7eQqaDXkxDxY267kIUfu4bau_tQ$>
> , *WG members are requested to indicate via reply to this list whether
> they support, or do not support, the Outputs.* If a WG member does not
> respond this will be taken as support.
>
>
>
> The Outputs are largely being presented in a single package and should be
> considered as an integrated set of Outputs, which are the result of many
> years of WG discussions and input received. This includes not only the work
> of the WG, but also the comments we received to Constituency Comments 1 &
> 2, the work of Work Tracks 1-5, comments to the Initial Report and the two
> Supplemental Initial Reports, and the comments to the Draft Final Report.
>  Therefore, there will likely be Outputs that you believe are imperfect,
> so the Co-Chairs encourage you to consider the Outputs in the aggregate. *Even
> if given that context, you still believe there are Outputs that you do NOT
> support, please specifically identify the Specific Recommendations and/or
> Implementation Guidance within the Outputs that you do cannot support and
> why.*
>
>
>
> For the purposes of this Consensus Call, the Outputs are being organized
> accordingly:
>
>    - *Topic 9: Registry Voluntary Commitments / Public Interest
>    Commitments;*
>    - *Topic 23: Closed Generics;*
>    - *Topic 34: Community Applications/CPE;*
>    - *Topic 35: Auctions: Mechanisms of Last Resort / Private Resolution
>    of Contention Sets; and*
>    - *All other Outputs in the report.*
>
>
>
> As noted on the 17 December 2020 WG call, the Consensus Call is being
> issues to Individual Working Group members (and not to the Constituencies,
> Stakeholder Groups, Supporting Organizations, and/or the Advisory
> Committees in which such individuals participate).  Therefore, WG members
> will be assumed to be responding to the consensus call on their own behalf
> unless they *explicitly state in their response* that they are responding
> on behalf of their group/organization. Following the close of the Consensus
> Call, the WG Co-Chairs will meet on Monday, 11 January 2021 to review the
> responses from the WG members and determine the Consensus Designations for
> the Outputs.  The WG Co-Chairs will post the results of their determination
> to the WG email distribution list on *January 11, 2021*.
>
>
>
> On 12 January 2021 at 20:00 UTC, the Working Group will have its next and
> hopefully final call to discuss any questions or comments to the Consensus
> Designations.  Calendar invites have been sent out to Working Group
> members.  Although the meeting is scheduled for 120 minutes, WG
> leadership will stay on the call until all questions have been
> addressed. Working Group members will then have until 13 January 2021 at
> 23:59 UTC to object to the Consensus Call designations. The final
> Consensus Call designations shall then be included in the Final Report.
>
>
>
> Finally, to the extent they are needed, WG members may begin working on
> minority statements now and through the Consensus Call period, with the
> ultimate due date of *18 January 2021*.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Steve, Julie and Emily on behalf of the SubPro Leadership Team
>
>
>
>
>
> <SubPro - Final Report - upd 22 Dec 2020 - Consensus Call.pdf>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the
> intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way
> by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this
> message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the
> email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete
> it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility
> for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this
> email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability
> for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of
> the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes
> Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales
> with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell
> Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in
> England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at
> 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a
> company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its
> registered office at 15 William Street, South West Lane, Edinburgh, EH3 7LL
> Scotland;Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered
> at Suite 332, Securities Building, 1904 Third Ave, Seattle, WA 98101; Com
> Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its
> registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033,
> Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com <https://comlaude.com>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210108/9dde36b0/attachment-0001.html>