[SubPro-IRT] Topic 19: Application Queuing

Mon Feb 19 19:33:12 UTC 2024

Rubens,

I am not sure what CA law requires written tickets or a physical draw to set the order for application review.  To the extent that you require consideration (i.e., payment) to get a benefit where such is determined by chance you create the risk of an illegal lottery. But if no consideration/payment  is required that risk goes away and it is unlikely that the process would be deemed a sweepstakes or promotion requiring registration under any state or country law as it is not open to the public or consumers but rather is a process for determining priority to a closed group of companies that applied for TLDs.

Re the need for draw tickets I think that is a bad and confusing phrase. But there seems to be value letting applicants choose whether they care about prioritization or not, and if they do, randomly selecting which order their application is reviewed.  If others agree then I would propose letting the applicant elect of they want to be prioritized and then if they do having a third party randomly assign order of review.

Maybe we are talking past each other and saying the same thing?

Best regards,

Marc H. Trachtenberg
Shareholder
Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601
T +1 312.456.1020
M +1 773.677.3305
trac at gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/>  |  View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h>

[Greenberg Traurig Logo]
[cid:image002.png at 01DA6338.2E3E1570]

From: SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl via SubPro-IRT
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 11:43 AM
To: subpro-irt at icann.org
Subject: Re: [SubPro-IRT] Topic 19: Application Queuing

Marc,

The reasons for the physical draw are rooted in California law; what you are suggesting would work in Nevada, I’m told. What I challenged was the need for the draw tickets now that this round will have the draw as it’s prioritization mechanism of choice since day 1.

Rubens

Em 19 de fev. de 2024, à(s) 14:35, <trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com>> <trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com>> escreveu:

I agree.  This is overly complicated and unnecessary.  Why use paper tickets and have them be purchased?  Is this 1980?  Why not just have the applicant elect electronically through the applicant portal whether or not they wat to participate in the prioritization draw.  Only certain authorized applicant representative have access to the portal so this should be both efficient and secure.  I also don’t think we need a live draw and can just use some recognized third party provider to conduct the draw and then announce the results.

Furthermore, and further to what Rubens posted below, purchasing tickets could be deemed an illegal lottery under the laws of various US states and other countries.  Generally, the elements of an illegal lottery are: chance, prize, and consideration, all of which would be present here.

So, in sum I think:

  1.  No tickets
  2.  Applicants elect to participate in the prioritization draw through the applicant portal by a certain date
  3.  Draw conducted by recognized provider and doesn’t have to be live

Best regards,

Marc H. Trachtenberg
Shareholder
Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601
T +1 312.456.1020
M +1 773.677.3305
trac at gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm at gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/>  |  View GT Biography<https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h>

<image001.png>
<image002.png>

From: SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt-bounces at icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Rubens Kuhl via SubPro-IRT
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 9:28 AM
To: subpro-irt at icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [SubPro-IRT] Topic 19: Application Queuing

*EXTERNAL TO GT*

Complicating things shouldn't be an implementation goal. From https://oag.ca.gov/charities/raffles<https://www.google.com/url?q=https://oag.ca.gov/charities/raffles&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1708359932350488&usg=AOvVaw3x9QF84Jb3OHI95hhYPblB>:
"Registration is not required if all tickets for a drawing are free, solicitations of voluntary donations to the organization are in no way connected to distribution of tickets, and this is made clear to all participants. If a "donation" is required in return for a ticket, registration is required."

So by selling tickets instead of giving them away, org is complicating itself and applicants unnecessarily.

Rubens

Em 16 de fev. de 2024, à(s) 11:22, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br<mailto:rubensk at nic.br>> escreveu:

Peter,

Using a separate ticket drawing was used in 2012 only because AGB foresaw Digital Archery. Now that the application will include priority ticket from the start, there is no sane reason to do it like this.

I suggested an alternative in the Google Doc.

Rubens

Em 16 de fev. de 2024, à(s) 07:38, Peter Eakin <peter.eakin at icann.org<mailto:peter.eakin at icann.org>> escreveu:

Dear IRT Members,

We are pleased to share a link to proposed AGB language on the subject of ‘Application Queuing’ for discussion at our meeting on Tuesday, 20 February 2024, based on the Board-adopted recommendations included in Topic 19 of the Final Report<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-02feb21-en.pdf#page=86>: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NndHCLSbv8MHmX-jsakfuj2LWRuAolGfherL0eJ-yCw/edit

A PDF version of this document and an agenda for Tuesday’s call is available here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=296583198

If you have any questions or concerns, or experience difficulties accessing the above links, please let us know in advance of the meeting.

Thanks and best wishes,

Peter

Peter Eakin (Mr)
Policy Research Specialist, Policy Research & Stakeholder Programs
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Tel: + 32 493 547 913
Office: 6 Rond Point Schuman, Bt. 1, Brussels B-1040, Belgium

_______________________________________________
SubPro-IRT mailing list
SubPro-IRT at icann.org<mailto:SubPro-IRT at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/subpro-irt

_______________________________________________
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.

________________________________
If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster at gtlaw.com<mailto:postmaster at gtlaw.com>, and do not use or disseminate the information.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/subpro-irt/attachments/20240219/829bf3ca/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 12852 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/subpro-irt/attachments/20240219/829bf3ca/image001-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6018 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/subpro-irt/attachments/20240219/829bf3ca/image002-0001.png>