March 2013 - APAC-Discuss - lists.icann.org

CALL FOR COMMENTS: At-Large Beijing Global Stakeholder Engagement Questions
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear All, The At-Large Beijing Global Stakeholder Engagement Questions Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/eYU3Ag> has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to gather the At-Large's questions for the Global Partnerships Department during the Beijing Meeting. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 15 Mar at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

CALL FOR COMMENTS: At-Large Beijing ICANN Board Questions
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear All, The At-Large Beijing ICANN Board Questions Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/d4U3Ag> has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to gather the At-Large's questions for the ICANN Board during the Beijing Meeting. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 15 Mar at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

CALL FOR COMMENTS: At-Large Beijing GAC Questions
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear All, The At-Large Beijing GAC Questions Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/doU3Ag> has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to gather the At-Large's questions for the GAC during the Beijing Meeting. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 15 Mar at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

Summary of RALO advice to the ALAC regarding the 5 objection statements to new gTLD applications
by Dev Anand Teelucksingh March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013

Dear All, As per the process by which the ALAC can object to a new gTLD application, (see one page PDF at http://bit.ly/how-ALAC-files-objection-to-new-gTLD ), RALOs have submitted advice to the ALAC on the objection statements on community grounds to 5 new gTLD applications. These objection statements were prepared by the gTLD Review Group (gTLD RG) based on the outcomes of its review and discussion of comments received by February 8, 2013 (see http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/2013q1/009493.html) The 5 applications and objection statements, including the comments received by the gTLD RG on the applications can be found on the workspace at https://community.icann.org/x/soxwAg with 5 separate wiki pages for each new gTLD application, the objection statement and the comments received by the gTLD RG. The RALO's advice to the ALAC were in the form of answers to the 5 questions listed at https://community.icann.org/x/t45wAg with the possible answers of either * Yes, support the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant, * No, NOT support the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant OR * Abstain Objection statements NOT supported by at least three RALOs will not be considered by the ALAC. For those objection statements that are supported by three or more RALOs, the ALAC will decide whether to file such objection statements to the Dispute Resolution Service Provider (DRSP) before the end of the objection period on March 13, 2013. Summary of RALO advice: 3 out of 5 RALOs supported the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant "DotHealth, LLC" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/t4xwAg) 3 out of 5 RALOs supported the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant "“Goose Fest, LLC" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/v4xwAg) 3 out of 5 RALOs supported the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant "dot Health Limited" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/xYxwAg) 3 out of 5 RALOs supported the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant "Afilias Limited" for the ".HEALTH" string ( https://community.icann.org/x/y4xwAg ) 1 out of 5 RALOs supported the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC support the filing of the objection statement by the ALAC against applicant "Stable Tone Limited" for the ".健康" (jiankang) string Therefore, the ALAC will have to consider the filing of the objection statement against: - applicant "DotHealth, LLC" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/t4xwAg) - applicant "“Goose Fest, LLC" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/v4xwAg) - applicant "dot Health Limited" for the ".HEALTH" string (https://community.icann.org/x/xYxwAg) - applicant "Afilias Limited" for the ".HEALTH" string ( https://community.icann.org/x/y4xwAg) As the objection statement against the applicant "Stable Tone Limited" for the for the ".健康" (jiankang) string failed to get RALO support, this statement will not be considered by the ALAC. An ALAC meeting to consider the advice by the RALOs is scheduled for Friday March 8 2013 https://community.icann.org/x/8JNwAg Kind Regards, Dev Anand Teelucksingh gTLD RG chair

4 3

Draft submission for .jiankang (.健康) to the ALAC
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

Dear All, Following Dev's recent email and noting that the ALAC will meet on Friday to discuss the RALO Objections, I have made some draft submissions which I intend to send to the ALAC in under 10 hours of sending this email. Apologies for the short notice, we were only recently told of our meeting. Any inconvenience caused is regretted. If you feel that there are things that are missing which I should add, please let me know. I have also made reference to the APRALO's general position on prioritising IDN gTLDs. Thank you. Kind Regards, Sala On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin(a)ttcsweb.org>wrote: > FYI - Dev Anand > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee(a)gmail.com> > Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:52 PM > Subject: [New gTLD RG] Fwd: PIC submission for .jiankang (.健康). > To: newgtldrg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > FYI - Dev Anand > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Stéphane Van Gelder Consulting <svg(a)stephanevangelder.com> > Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:51 PM > Subject: PIC submission for .jiankang (.健康). > To: DEVTee(a)gmail.com > Cc: Jasonscdu <jasonscdu(a)aol.com> > > > Hi Dev, > > On behalf of Stable Tone, applicant for the .jiankang (.健康). IDN gTLD, > please find attached the PIC submission. > > If you feel that it might be useful to do so, please share with your > colleagues in ALAC. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any > questions you may have. > > Kind regards, > > > Stéphane Van Gelder > Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur > STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING > > T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053 > T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89 > Skype: SVANGELDER > www.StephaneVanGelder.com > ---------------- > Follow us on Twitter: @stephvg > Facebook: www.facebook.com/DomainConsultant > LinkedIn: fr.linkedin.com/in/domainconsultant/ > > _______________________________________________ > Newgtldrg mailing list > Newgtldrg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/newgtldrg > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

1 0

Fwd: [New gTLD RG] Fwd: PIC submission for .jiankang (.健康).
by Dev Anand Teelucksingh March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

FYI - Dev Anand ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee(a)gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:52 PM Subject: [New gTLD RG] Fwd: PIC submission for .jiankang (.健康). To: newgtldrg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org FYI - Dev Anand ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Stéphane Van Gelder Consulting <svg(a)stephanevangelder.com> Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:51 PM Subject: PIC submission for .jiankang (.健康). To: DEVTee(a)gmail.com Cc: Jasonscdu <jasonscdu(a)aol.com> Hi Dev, On behalf of Stable Tone, applicant for the .jiankang (.健康). IDN gTLD, please find attached the PIC submission. If you feel that it might be useful to do so, please share with your colleagues in ALAC. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions you may have. Kind regards, Stéphane Van Gelder Chairman and Managing Director/Fondateur STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING T (UK): +44 (0)7583 457053 T (FR): +33 (0)6 20 40 55 89 Skype: SVANGELDER www.StephaneVanGelder.com ---------------- Follow us on Twitter: @stephvg Facebook: www.facebook.com/DomainConsultant LinkedIn: fr.linkedin.com/in/domainconsultant/ _______________________________________________ Newgtldrg mailing list Newgtldrg(a)icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/newgtldrg

3 2

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection - APRALO vote proposed
by Holly Raiche March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

Hi Maureen and Dev and everyone First, I want to thank everyone on the list for their comments. People took a lot of time and trouble, and argued well. So the final vote was not easy. The first four applications caused little dissent - noone suggested that we not support Dev's recommendations, so the vote yes was easy. The fifth was harder. I have to say there was a good deal of discussion on the issue - which I found really helpful and healthy. As you would have read, the comments went from flat no - not supporting an objection, to yes - what is the problem. Edmon was very helpful in his comments, as was Rinalia. And given that they had gone into the language and characters in a way that others couldn't, I took their lead. Edmon's response was a plea for, at the least, abstain. Others wanted the confusion addressed. In the end, it had to be a statement of concern that reflected what I was reading, and if that isn't possible, an abstention. So my final vote (which I got wrong when I voted last night - too late to think straight but concerned to meet the deadline) was for a plea first for clarification. If there can't be clarification, then abstain. That won't make everyone happy, but I think that comes down on the side of where most people were thinking. Again, thank you everyone for your participation in what was not an easy decision to come to. Holly On 07/03/2013, at 3:33 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: > Holly > > I don't think I made the deadline even if I had a vote. But it is > interesting what people create out of a word.. its like being on Keith's > Freedom of Interpretation Working Group.. a word can mean so many different > things to different people. I wanted to look at it from the proposer's > intent.. although this was a little confusing as well. > > I was thinking to abstain... because there was still too much to know, > directly from those who actually put forward the proposal.. to explain it > themselves.. It was confusing getting everyone's interpretation of what the > applicants were trying to say.. although it was an interesting conversation. > > > If I HAD to vote YES or NO.. I think I would have moved more towards voting > YES to the objection- if there is going to be any doubt or misinterpretation > by any users, then I'm not sure it should be out there. Mind you, others > like .doctor are a concern too. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: apac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Holly > Raiche > Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2013 3:02 p.m. > To: apralo Discuss > Subject: [APAC-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection - APRALO vote > proposed > > Hi Everyone > > Today is the deadline for APRALO votes on this issue. > >> From what has been said on the list, there is no issue with supporting > objections for the first 4 application for health. > > Also, form what has been an extensive discussion, we can separate out the > fifth application - and at the least, abstain. > > Please let me know if you you are not happy for me to cast the APRALO vote > in this way. > > Holly > > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >

1 0

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection - APRALO vote proposed
by Richard - Netmission Ambassador March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

My vote is NO for the objection as stated with my understanding of the wordings. Richard Netmission.ASIA On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Out of interest in the matter of ALAC objection on Table Stone" > > How many ALSes vote YES? > How many ALSes vote NO? > How many ALSes vote ABSTAIN? > > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > My support is exactly on the lines of what Rinalia has said. We should go > > ahead with a Yes to Objection. > > > > Best > > > > Fouad > > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim < > > rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > On the objection regarding the 4 applications for ".health" in the > Latin > > > script, there is no question that the objection should be supported > > (i.e., > > > Vote: Yes to objection). > > > > > > On the objection regarding the application for " “.健康” in the Han > > script, a > > > nuanced position is required (i.e., Vote: No to objection, BUT with a > > > caveat). > > > > > > I understand that you have to vote YES/NO/ABSTAIN. I trust that you > can > > > submit the vote *and the caveat* via a remarks field if it is available > > or > > > via a separate mail to the relevant parties. The ALAC will be > > considering > > > regional advice in its deliberations on whether or not to proceed with > > the > > > objections and it has experience in handling nuance. > > > > > > *Caveat on support for “.健康”:* > > > I would support Stable Tone's application if the company voluntarily > > > commits to being socially responsible and submits enforceable Public > > > Interest Commitment (PIC) specifications to ICANN for inclusion in its > > new > > > gTLD registry agreement with a genuine intent to carry them out to > > address > > > the weaknesses in its application with regard to consumer protection > > (i.e., > > > clear guidelines for assessing potential harm to consumers and consumer > > > health and the appropriate measures for addressing that harm including > > > consultations with relevant experts/authorities) and where violation of > > the > > > PIC would result in loss of license to operate the TLD. > > > > > > In the event that such PIC is not forthcoming from Stable Tone, I will > > > overturn my support for “.健康” at the ALAC level when it is time for the > > > ALAC to make a decision. > > > > > > In addition and in relation to this, I urge the APRALO community to > > > intensify its work with the ALAC to ensure that ICANN is able to > enforce > > > gTLD contractual obligations rigorously. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Rinalia Abdul Rahim > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Holly Raiche < > h.raiche(a)internode.on.net > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Everyone > > > > > > > > Today is the deadline for APRALO votes on this issue. > > > > > > > > >From what has been said on the list, there is no issue with > supporting > > > > objections for the first 4 application for health. > > > > > > > > Also, form what has been an extensive discussion, we can separate out > > the > > > > fifth application - and at the least, abstain. > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you you are not happy for me to cast the APRALO > > > vote > > > > in this way. > > > > > > > > Holly > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards. > > -------------------------- > > Fouad Bajwa > > ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor > > My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/ > > Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa > > _______________________________________________ > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >

1 0

Re: [APAC-Discuss] [NA-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

FYI yes I have cross posted as it IS an important discussion and I have also made clear my personal view is in line with APRALO voting No or abstaining from this matter (also stated on the relevant briefing teleconference recently held) BUT it is our APRALO Chair who will cast the votes ( or not) today and informed, I trust, from these discussions, and the APRALO member contributions on the wiki page <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40930513&focusedCo…> *Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... **(CLO)* http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr On 6 March 2013 11:22, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > Well, there is a lively discussion going on within APRALO on how to > handle this, with some Chinese speakers (or at least Rinalia) having > significant problems with not objecting to the Chinese string. > > And Cheryl just cross-posted Garth's statement to their list! > > My personal position is that we should support the objection to 4 > .health strings but not to the Chinese string. My rationale is that > there clearly IS controversy over what is meant by the string and it > is not sufficiently clear-cut for me to support an objection. On the > other 4, I believe that we followed our carefully planned processes > and I feel that support is reasonable. > > Alan > > > At 05/03/2013 06:51 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > >My initial reaction is to trust our own Chinese-speaking associates on the > >IDN health/healthy issue. My smattering of working with other languages is > >enough to know that we can't pre-suppose to know whether the applied-for > >IDN is *intended* as a category/noun or an adjective. I personally would > >consult with APRALO and support their direction over and above the stated > >aims of the applicant. If APRALO supports the objection to the IDN, that's > >good enough for me. > > > >As for the other objections -- I disagree that there is no defined > >community. Without one the objections would have gone no further in the > >process than those against .patagonia. What matters, from our PoV, is > >whether objection put forward by this particular community -- health > >practitioner professionals -- is sufficient enough to sustain objection as > >a matter of public interest. > > > >I personally don' t have a strong opinion on this and could easily be > >persuaded either way. > > > >- Evan > > > > > >On 5 March 2013 18:33, Garth Bruen <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear NARALO'ers (-ites?), > > > > > > The region must answer a series of questions (one for each applicant) > in > > > response to the .HEALTH objection: > > > > > > > > > https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/Advice+from+the+RALOs+to+the+A > > > LAC+regarding+the+objection+statements > > > > > > My recommendation is to answer "NO" or to abstain in ALL FIVE cases > and I > > > will explain why. > > > > > > Some members of the region believed the system had been "gamed" in the > > > denial of the .AMAZON, .PATAGOINA, etc. objections. Well, I am > concerned > > > also about gaming but from a different direction. My first and foremost > > > concern is the integrity of At-Large, and I believe that answering > "Yes" to > > > these objection questions may result in a misuse of our authority in > this > > > portion of the objection process. I have two concerns: one specific > and one > > > general. > > > > > > First, one of the objections is to a Chinese IDN string application. > This > > > IDN was bundled in the objection with the four Latin-script/English > > > Language > > > "HEALTH" strings. However, the IDN is variously translated as > "HEALTHY" as > > > well as "HEALTH." In our Review Group discussions I made the point that > > > "HEALTH" is an industry and "HEALTHY" is a general state. In further > review > > > of the application for the IDN string the applicant marked the > translation > > > as "HEALTHY" and even more broadly described it as "WELLNESS." The > > > objection > > > to the .HEALTH applications firmly frames its concerns as the > > > medical-industry use of the word "HEALTH." The application for the > Chinese > > > IDN concerns a much more general category and as such is not factually > > > covered by the objection. I lobbied unsuccessfully within the Review > Group > > > to drop this objection from the list as it does not fit the situation > and > > > the passing of this objection may appear to be a mistake by members of > the > > > community who actually speak Chinese. > > > > > > Second, I am opposed to the other four objections regardless of the > > > specific > > > problems with the Chinese IDN objection. My opposition stems from the > fact > > > that this does not appear to be a true community objection. While the > > > objector has healthcare related credentials I have significant doubts > about > > > the sincerity objection. The objection makes the case that .HEALTH > needs > > > special protections to keep consumers from being abused in terms of > > > potentially fraudulent medical websites. While I would agree, the > objector > > > did not file similar objections to .MEDICAL, .HEALTHCARE, .DENTIST, > > > .DENTAL, > > > .DOCTOR, .HOSPITAL, .SURGERY or .MED. When the objector was asked why, > his > > > answer only confirmed my suspicion of his specific objection to the > > > "HEALTH" > > > string and not new gTLDs potentially impacting the medical or health > > > communities. Further, this objection appears in large part to be > backed and > > > supported by the World Health Organization. While the WHO represents > global > > > health interests it is my personal belief the objection to this string > > > represents a narrow interest in the string itself and not the meaning. > It > > > is > > > my opinion that this objection, if supported by At-Large, in fact > > > represents > > > a more serious threat to the public interest than deployment of the > string > > > itself. > > > > > > Anyone should feel free to disagree or engage in discussion. > > > > > > Thank you, Garth > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > > > > Garth Bruen > > > gbruen(a)knujon.com > > > > > > > > > ------ > > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >Evan Leibovitch > >Toronto Canada > > > >Em: evan at telly dot org > >Sk: evanleibovitch > >Tw: el56 > >------ > >NA-Discuss mailing list > >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > >------ > > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ >

6 6

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection
by Alan Greenberg March 5, 2013

March 5, 2013

That message from Garth was just posted a few minutes ago, so the replies have not yet arrived. See http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/date.html as they come in. Alan At 05/03/2013 06:52 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >Thanks Cheryl. This was useful reading. > >Kind Regards, >Sala > >On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr ><langdonorr(a)gmail.com>wrote: > > > FYI... from the sister NA discuss list copied here as I suspect not all of > > you subscribe to all lists... > > *Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... **(CLO)* > > http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Garth Bruen <gbruen(a)knujon.com> > > Date: 6 March 2013 10:33 > > Subject: [NA-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection > > To: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > > Dear NARALO'ers (-ites?), > > > > The region must answer a series of questions (one for each applicant) in > > response to the .HEALTH objection: > > > > > https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/Advice+from+the+RALOs+to+the+A > > LAC+regarding+the+objection+statements > > > > My recommendation is to answer "NO" or to abstain in ALL FIVE cases and I > > will explain why. > > > > Some members of the region believed the system had been "gamed" in the > > denial of the .AMAZON, .PATAGOINA, etc. objections. Well, I am concerned > > also about gaming but from a different direction. My first and foremost > > concern is the integrity of At-Large, and I believe that answering "Yes" to > > these objection questions may result in a misuse of our authority in this > > portion of the objection process. I have two concerns: one specific and one > > general. > > > > First, one of the objections is to a Chinese IDN string application. This > > IDN was bundled in the objection with the four Latin-script/English > > Language > > "HEALTH" strings. However, the IDN is variously translated as "HEALTHY" as > > well as "HEALTH." In our Review Group discussions I made the point that > > "HEALTH" is an industry and "HEALTHY" is a general state. In further review > > of the application for the IDN string the applicant marked the translation > > as "HEALTHY" and even more broadly described it as "WELLNESS." The > > objection > > to the .HEALTH applications firmly frames its concerns as the > > medical-industry use of the word "HEALTH." The application for the Chinese > > IDN concerns a much more general category and as such is not factually > > covered by the objection. I lobbied unsuccessfully within the Review Group > > to drop this objection from the list as it does not fit the situation and > > the passing of this objection may appear to be a mistake by members of the > > community who actually speak Chinese. > > > > Second, I am opposed to the other four objections regardless of the > > specific > > problems with the Chinese IDN objection. My opposition stems from the fact > > that this does not appear to be a true community objection. While the > > objector has healthcare related credentials I have significant doubts about > > the sincerity objection. The objection makes the case that .HEALTH needs > > special protections to keep consumers from being abused in terms of > > potentially fraudulent medical websites. While I would agree, the objector > > did not file similar objections to .MEDICAL, .HEALTHCARE, .DENTIST, > > .DENTAL, > > .DOCTOR, .HOSPITAL, .SURGERY or .MED. When the objector was asked why, his > > answer only confirmed my suspicion of his specific objection to the > > "HEALTH" > > string and not new gTLDs potentially impacting the medical or health > > communities. Further, this objection appears in large part to be backed and > > supported by the World Health Organization. While the WHO represents global > > health interests it is my personal belief the objection to this string > > represents a narrow interest in the string itself and not the meaning. It > > is > > my opinion that this objection, if supported by At-Large, in fact > > represents > > a more serious threat to the public interest than deployment of the string > > itself. > > > > Anyone should feel free to disagree or engage in discussion. > > > > Thank you, Garth > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > > Garth Bruen > > gbruen(a)knujon.com > > > > > > ------ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > > ------ > > _______________________________________________ > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > >-- >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862 >Suva >Fiji > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Tel: +679 3544828 >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >_______________________________________________ >APAC-Discuss mailing list >APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > >Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

2 1