<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
Alex,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think you are overcomplicating this. The cities have some responsibility for their own actions. Your experience shows that it is generally difficult to get the cities to sign the letter. But if some do easily without thinking about it then it’s on Them.
Having the ability to revoke the non-opposition before application should be enough protection for them. That actually create a significant risk but the applicant who may have invested significantly in the application only to have the rug pulled out from
them at the last minute by the city but I guess that’s a risk they will have to bear. But this ability to revoke the non-oppsition must end at the time the application is filed or the applicant is even further prejudiced by the late revocation after they paid
their application fees. I say make the requirement that the applicant have the letter within 12 or 18 months of application and be done with it. In general I think we need to move toward simplicity and predictability. Every aspect of the process and program
can’t be complicated. <br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best Regards,</div>
<b>
<div><b><br>
</b></div>
Marc H.Trachtenberg</b>
<div>
<div>Chair, Internet, Domain Name, eCommerce, and Social Media Practice</div>
<div>Shareholder</div>
<div>Greenberg Traurig, LLP</div>
<div>77 West Wacker Drive</div>
<div>Chicago, IL 60601</div>
<div>Office (312) 456-1020</div>
<div>Mobile (773) 677-3305</div>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Oct 14, 2023, at 1:02 AM, Alexander <alexander@schubert.berlin> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#0e0e3f"><b>*EXTERNAL TO GT*</b><br>
<br>
</font></div>
<div dir="auto">Hi,</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Thanks for your email. You wrote:</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">This has the same problem as my suggestion. It still requires a second government action. What if the application process required the applicant, at the time of submission, to attest that there have been no material changes that would compromise
the letter of support?</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">No: in almost all cases the second approach (Government has the ability to retract a letter) doesn't require anything: some applicant acquired a letter of support very early on - nobody else tries to apply for the same city - everything is fine.
The letter of support continues to be valid - neither the applicant nor the Government have to act at all. And the problem I want to mitigate has nothing to do with "changes that compromise the letter of support".</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Here the underlying problem again (you can skip the very long indented part if you know the underlying problem already in detail):</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">In 2012 nobody knew at the time of application submission that city gTLDs would be financially successful and nobody knew that the contention set resolution would be an auction. Also: the application fees where prohibitive high at US $185,000.
This landscape has now changed completely: there is a huge incentive trying to get into a city-gTLD contention set, because:</div>
<div dir="auto">The application fees will likely drop dramatically (hopefully not below US $100,000 - but maybe as low as $50k). For two applicants with letter of support (or non-objection) for the same city gTLD the AGB prescribes an auction as contention
set resolution. If you win the auction at $500k - you have an entire city gTLD for a fairly low amount - and can either sell it to someone in the city (e.g. a media company) for profit or "milk" the TLD (sell premium domains at high prices, make money during
the sunrise period with TM owners, etc) without any effort. If you lose the auction at $500k: you probably still get some of your application fees back AND the $500k as auction loser! Or you approach the other applicant (e.g. a city constituent managed, owned
and financed local grassroots community effort with the backing of the local business community) and ask "ransom": offer to withdraw your application early for a cash payment! In such case you get almost all application fees back AND cash in on the ransom.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I wanted to mitigate this scenario:</div>
<div dir="auto">Some 'grey actor' (maybe even 'bad actor') sending out hundreds of requests to sign a simple letter of non-objection to city governments in industrial countries (U.S., EU, UK, etc) very early out, e.g. early next year. Merely a letter that states
basically "Once ICANN allows to apply for a gTLD '.yourcity' we intend to apply and subsequently operate it - so your businesses and organizations can have myname.yourcity domains at very low prices. Do you object such effort? If not then please sign this
letter!"</div>
<div dir="auto">Sending out such letter to a few hundred city Governments is a simple and low cost effort. A certain percentage will sign the letter and return it: at such early time (e.g. early 2024) in most cases no local applicant entity will be yet visible
to the city Government. So why not signing a letter that sounds very harmless?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Then in 2026 the grey actor sits on a pile of such letters of non-objection, knows the application submission fees, can scout for local city based application efforts and target these strings. The grey actor will "make money" for sure. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Already in 2012 (with high application fees, no knowledge about auctions and a very convoluted environment that made the application process very difficult) we had all kinds of efforts to use gTLD applications as "investment vehicle".</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Now:</div>
<div dir="auto">How do we tackle the problem? Most if not all geo gTLDs will be cities. I started (together with Dirk and Katrin) out to form such applicant entity already in 2006. As early as 2019 I formed an applicant entity for the next round - including
lobbying at the city government level and within the business community (presenting in person to chambers and business associations). In the U.S.! Here their very predictable feedback:</div>
<div dir="auto">"We don't want 'somebody' to operate our city gTLD namespace with the priority to 'make money' - instead the gTLD should be managed with a focus on creating a maximum benefit for all city constituents. Example:
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://tires.city__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEMSXy9Zn$">
tires.city</a>, <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://books.city__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEBzPpGx7$">
books.city</a> or <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://dentist.city__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEPBQH-1w$">
dentist.city</a> shouldn't be auctioned off to 'somebody' who maybe sits far away in California and will just hold the domain for speculative reasons or to run some Amazon affiliate website (siphoning off revenues to online businesses outside of our city):
instead we want to auction premium domains within our city business community so that these premium domains positively impact the local business community and keep revenues in the city. E.g.
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://books.city__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEBzPpGx7$">
books.city</a> supporting one or all bookstores in the city - and not the Amazon online bookstore. We want books to be sold locally - not via online store from far away. We want a tight community control. We are willing to fund the effort in return. The effort
should be community owned, managed and funded. And non-profit. Like a chamber. Not profit maximization for the gTLD operator but positive community impact should guide the gTLD management. Especially the management of the impact domain names."</div>
</blockquote>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div id="composer_signature" dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Sorry for the long explanation: but do you now see the problem? How to make sure a city government has the explicit or implicit power to empower such local effort over some entity that just wants to cash in at auctions (or negotiate ransom outside
of auctions) and that has solicited a simple letter of non-objection very early on (e.g. 2024)?</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Hence my suggestion that the signature under such letter of non-objection shouldn't be older than 6 months. If you are tight knit with your city government then getting a new signature on an older letter shouldn't take more than a few days.
But even if it took a year: 6 months before application date PLUS seemingly 9 months 'late filing' per AGB - that's an extraordinary long period of time for getting a city major to sign a letter. At least for a city Government.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Or allow the Government to retract a premature signed letter of non-objection if they want to support a local effort that wasn't visible at the time such letter was signed.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">We had exactly that problem in the 2012 round with .africa: ages old support letter from one applicant that allegedly had already been retracted - but the AGB had no specifications in that relation: a signed letter is a signed letter, period.
Which resulted in an extraordinary vicious fight that caused intolerable delays and was very costly and exhausting for the applicants, ICANN and the community at large. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Maybe we should have both:</div>
<div dir="auto">A minimum requirement for the age of the signature (6 months plus 9 months AGB late filing) and the stipulation that a retracted letter is insufficient for application. This provides a much better control to the city Government: the entity elected
by their citizens to manage all aspects pertaining their city. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Regards,</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Alexander </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">_______________________________________</div>
<div dir="auto">Alexander Schubert </div>
<div dir="auto"><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.linkedin.com/in/AlexanderSchubert__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEG9itUFq$">www.linkedin.com/in/AlexanderSchubert</a></div>
<div dir="auto">+1(202)684-6806</div>
<div dir="auto"></div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div align="left" dir="auto" style="font-size:100%;color:#000000">
<div>-------- Original message --------</div>
<div>From: samlanfranco@gmail.com </div>
<div>Date: 14/10/23 01:59 (GMT+02:00) </div>
<div>To: alexander@schubert.berlin </div>
<div>Cc: trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> </div>
<div>Subject: Re: [SubPro-IRT] Topic 21.1: Geographic Names - Updated </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Alexander writes:<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">"How about the following: If the government entity withdraws their letter of support before the application deadline – such letter would be illegible to support the application? We have such provision in the AGB for later stages of the geo gTLD
life cycle – just not for the application phase. That would work, too."<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">This has the same problem as my suggestion. It still requires a second government action. What if the application process required the applicant, at the time of submission, to attest that there have been no material changes that would compromise
the letter of support? <br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">If there were none, we'll and good. If there were changes, the applicant would have compromised their application with a false submission. There could be a grey area here, but when are there not risks of grey areas.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Just a thought.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Sam Lanfranco <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Internet Elder, Internet Ecologist, 416 816-2852</div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
</div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>SubPro-IRT mailing list</span><br>
<span>SubPro-IRT@icann.org</span><br>
<span>https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/subpro-irt__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEND6o9aF$
</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEOHgNhyU$
) and the website Terms of Service (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos__;!!DUT_TFPxUQ!DE0TDM20erVjzRB04gLVq-oy-JJDfESzKMKF2FbAPA4h170Ef3mUdC4uC6GjgIJjQE5m28k_5_ru873Un1-GEL61nQ7b$ ). 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.</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<HR>If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster@gtlaw.com, and do not use or disseminate the information.<BR>
</body>
</html>