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

DOODLE / APRALO December Monthly call
by At-Large Staff 26 Aug '13

26 Aug '13

Dear All, Due to our next APRALO call falling on 25 December 2012 (Christmas Day), please complete the attached Doodle poll to schedule this call a week before. http://doodle.com/bhe5m3arzuqkbeum This Doodle poll will close on Tuesday 11 December 2012 at 1500 UTC. The date and time will be announced shortly thereafter. Thank you. 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 One World, One Internet

12 36

Re: [APAC-Discuss] [ALAC] [IDN-WG] Draft Statement on TMCH and Variants
by Alan Greenberg 13 May '13

13 May '13

Note that the TMCH has two separate components. The backend and the interface with registries is, I believe, a single database and is being run under contract to ICANN by IBM. The interface to TM holders and the validation service is contracted to Deloitte. The design explicitly allows for distributed user interfaces and validation services to ensure proper handling of different languages, scripts and TM law. Alan At 23/04/2013 07:17 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote: >Also agree with Yaovi on removing the word "centralized" >And thanks to Hong and Rinala for the work done on this statement. > >Dev Anand > >On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> wrote: > > +1 > > > > In any case, the opening of offices in Turkey and Singapore makes it hard > > to argue that ICANN isn't at least making an attempt to decentralize. > > > > (Please don't see my relative silence as lack of interest, but rather lack > > of depth in the issue) > > > > - Evan > > > > > > On 23 April 2013 14:19, Yaovi Atohoun <yaovito(a)yahoo.fr> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> In the statement we can read : > >> "... we strongly urge ICANN to move away from a model that is centralized, > >> inflexible and unfriendly to variants. " > >> > >> My question : Is is not possible to have a model that is centralized and > >> taking into account IDN variant issues? > >> If so my recommendation is to remove the word "Centralized" in the > >> sentence above. > >> > >> > >> Yaovi > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> De : JJS <jjs.global(a)gmail.com> > >> À : Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> > >> Cc : apralo <apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>; No name < > >> idn-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>; ALAC Working List < > >> alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > >> Envoyé le : Dimanche 21 avril 2013 4h11 > >> Objet : Re: [ALAC] [IDN-WG] Draft Statement on TMCH and Variants > >> > >> > >> *Dear Rinalia,* > >> * > >> * > >> *you've done a very thorough job, thank you. * > >> *Below, my **suggested modifications in red.* > >> * > >> * > >> *ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on Trademark > Clearinghouse and IDN Variants > >> * > >> > >> The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) is deeply concerned by the > >> implementation model outlined in the Trademark Clearinghouse: Rights > >> Protection Mechanism Requirements published > on April 6, 2013. We view the > >> model to be deficient in that it overlooks the critical issue of IDN > >> variants; thus implemented, the model would clearly run against the public > >> interest in the pertinent > >> user communities.* > >> * > >> > >> *(1) Domain Name Matching* > >> > >> Language communities have requested that TMCH services factor IDN-script > >> trademarks involving variants and that ICANN consider adopting > >> community-based solutions to address this issue since October 2011. > >> Despite > >> concerns raised by language community experts in the TMCH Implementation > >> Assistance Group (IAG), the domain name matching requirements of the TMCH > >> still does not take into account trademarks in IDN scripts involving > >> variants. Variant matching is critical in certain languages and > >> particularly in Chinese. To illustrate, when a trademark > >> holder registers a simplified Chinese word-mark and not its traditional > >> equivalent, the TMCH will accordingly generate only one trademark record. > >> The > >> new gTLD registries are obliged to offer sunrise services and trademark > >> claims for trademarks recorded in the TMCH. Without variant matching > >> requirements in place, only that registered simplified word-mark will be > >> eligible for trademark protection. This leaves the traditional word-mark > >> equivalent open for cybersquatting. Given that both simplified and > >> traditional writings of the word-mark are deemed identical by Chinese > >> communities worldwide (and by norm few trademarks are registered in both > >> writings), > >> ruling out the un-registered writing by not > allowing variant matching would > >> make the TMCH completely useless to Chinese > trademarks, and would result in > >> an unfair penalty against users of Chinese. > >> > >> *A More Open and Flexible TMCH Model* > >> > >> Trademarks have a very important function in safeguarding the public > >> interest by > >> identifying the source of goods and services. > >> > >> *The rest seems fine.* > >> * > >> * > >> *Best regards,* > >> *Jean-Jacques.* > >> > >> > >> 2013/4/20 Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> > >> > >> > Dear Members of the IDN WG, APRALO and ALAC Colleagues, > >> > > >> > I have revised the proposed " *ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on > >> Trademark > >> > Clearinghouse and IDN Variants*" based on Hong's draft, input received > >> in > >> > Beijing and my own consultation with IDN Variant experts. > >> > > >> > Please review and comment on the draft on > the wiki for tracking purposes. > >> > The wiki page for the draft is here - > >> > > >> > > >> > https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/ALAC+Advice+to+the+ICANN+… > >> > > >> > Once the text is deemed satisfactory, it will be forwarded to the ALAC > >> for > >> > a vote. Please try your best to respond with comments by Friday April > >> > 26th. > >> > > >> > Text pasted below for rapid review. The final version will be proofread > >> > and > >> > a summary of recommendations will be produced as part of the final > >> version > >> > (as per our norm in giving advice to the Board). > >> > > >> > Best regards, > >> > > >> > Rinalia > >> > > >> > *ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on Trademark Clearinghouse and IDN > >> > Variants > >> > * > >> > > >> > The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) is deeply concerned by the > >> > implementation model outlined in the Trademark Clearinghouse: Rights > >> > Protection Mechanism Requirements published on April 6, 2013. We view > >> the > >> > model to be deficient in that it overlooks the critical issue of IDN > >> > variants, which would seriously impact the public interest in the > >> pertinent > >> > user communities. > >> > > >> > We wish to highlight two areas of particular concern in the Trademark > >> > Clearinghouse (TMCH) requirements: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > *(1) Domain Name Matching* > >> > > >> > Language communities have requested that TMCH services factor IDN-script > >> > trademarks involving variants and that ICANN consider adopting > >> > community-based solutions to address this issue since October 2011. > >> > Despite > >> > concerns raised by language community experts in the TMCH Implementation > >> > Assistance Group (IAG), the domain name > matching requirements of the TMCH > >> > still does not take into account trademarks in IDN scripts involving > >> > variants. Variant matching is critical for certain languages and > >> > particularly for the Chinese language. To illustrate, when a trademark > >> > holder registers a simplified Chinese word-mark and not its traditional > >> > equivalent, the TMCH will accordingly > generate only one trademark record. > >> > The > >> > new gTLD registries are obliged to offer sunrise services and trademark > >> > claims for trademarks recorded in the TMCH. Without variant matching > >> > requirements in place, only that registered simplified word-mark will be > >> > eligible for trademark protection. This > leaves the traditional word-mark > >> > equivalent open for cybersquatting. Given that both simplified and > >> > traditional writings of the word-mark are > deemed identical by the Chinese > >> > community (and by norm few trademarks are registered in both writings), > >> > ruling out the un-registered writing by not allowing variant matching > >> would > >> > make the TMCH completely useless to Chinese trademarks. > >> > > >> > > >> > *(2) Domain Name Bundling* > >> > > >> > The TMCH requirements specifically prohibit any registry from > >> implementing > >> > variant or bundling rules and allocating domain names under such > >> variant > >> > or bundling rules prior to the conclusion > of the Sunrise Period. Such a > >> > restriction would exclude the accommodation of any solution for IDN > >> > trademarks involving variants during the > sunrise period at the TLD level, > >> > even though registries may be willing to address the variants through > >> their > >> > own registration management and at their own expense. > >> > > >> > *A More Open and Flexible TMCH Model* > >> > > >> > Trademarks have a very important function of safeguarding the public > >> > interest by > >> > identifying the source of goods and services. If left unaddressed, the > >> > deficiencies of the TMCH model design may likely cause serious public > >> > confusion and result in market chaos. In principle, the At-Large > >> community > >> > does not support over-extensive trademark protection measures. However, > >> we > >> > do strongly believe that ICANN should treat all trademarks equally, > >> > irrespective of the characters of the > trademarks, and that users from all > >> > language communities should be protected from confusion equally. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In September 2012, the ALAC statement on > the TMCH called for a more open > >> > and flexible model that can address our communitys concerns regarding > >> the > >> > limitations of a uniform model, which would be applied to all gTLD > >> > registries irrespective of their differences and competencies. We > >> believe > >> > that new gTLD registries require a more open and flexible TMCH model to > >> be > >> > successful and we strongly urge ICANN to move away from a model that is > >> > centralized, inflexible and unfriendly to variants. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > In light of the considerations above, the ALAC urges the ICANN Board to > >> > call for a more open and flexible TMCH model. Towards this end, we urge > >> > the Board to support a community-based, bottom-up solution for TMCH > >> > implementation and to ensure that the IDN variant issue is addressed > >> before > >> > the TMCH begin providing services to the new gTLD registries. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > We understand that addressing the IDN Variant issue in a holistic way > >> > requires the development of Label Generation Rules (LGR) for the Root > >> Zone, > >> > which experts and Staff have projected to > require a minimum of 12 months. > >> > We > >> > appreciate that the LGR development requires conscientious effort to > >> > maintain the security and stability of the Internet, but we are also > >> > mindful that the business and practical requirements of new gTLD > >> > applicants, especially from developing economies, call for urgent > >> > implementation. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > To expedite the development of appropriate > solutions, the ALAC recommends > >> > that the Board request from the ICANN CEO an interim mechanism that can > >> > yield such solutions efficiently and on an urgent basis. This may > >> require > >> > additional Staff with the appropriate linguistic capabilities working in > >> > tandem with community members with relevant expertise. It may also > >> require > >> > a consideration of expediting the LGR process for the Han script. We > >> > understand that in the general case, the handling of variants is a > >> complex > >> > issue. However, for variant cases that are well defined and understood, > >> > such as the case of the Han script, ICANN should proceed on a fast-track > >> > basis to include variant support in the TMCH in time to accommodate the > >> > delegation of the appropriate TLDs. > >> > > >> > END > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > IDN-WG mailing list > >> > IDN-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg > >> > > >> > IDN WG Wiki: > >> > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+IDN+Policy > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ALAC mailing list > >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >> > >> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >> ALAC Working Wiki: > >> > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ALAC mailing list > >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >> > >> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >> ALAC Working Wiki: > >> > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Evan Leibovitch > > Toronto Canada > > > > Em: evan at telly dot org > > Sk: evanleibovitch > > Tw: el56 > > _______________________________________________ > > ALAC mailing list > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > > > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > > ALAC Working Wiki: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > >_______________________________________________ >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

10 18

REMINDER: MEETING REPORTS
by ICANN At-Large Staff 03 May '13

03 May '13

Dear All, As a reminder, please be sure to submit your meeting reports to the At-Large Beijing Meeting Reports Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/gYU3Ag>. 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>

3 2

Re: [APAC-Discuss] [IDN-WG] Draft Statement on TMCH and Variants
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim 02 May '13

02 May '13

Dear Members of the IDN WG, APRALO and ALAC Colleagues, I have revised the proposed " *ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on Trademark Clearinghouse and IDN Variants*" based on Hong's draft, input received in Beijing and my own consultation with IDN Variant experts. Please review and comment on the draft on the wiki for tracking purposes. The wiki page for the draft is here - https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/ALAC+Advice+to+the+ICANN+… Once the text is deemed satisfactory, it will be forwarded to the ALAC for a vote. Please try your best to respond with comments by Friday April 26th. Text pasted below for rapid review. The final version will be proofread and a summary of recommendations will be produced as part of the final version (as per our norm in giving advice to the Board). Best regards, Rinalia *ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on Trademark Clearinghouse and IDN Variants * The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) is deeply concerned by the implementation model outlined in the “Trademark Clearinghouse: Rights Protection Mechanism Requirements” published on April 6, 2013. We view the model to be deficient in that it overlooks the critical issue of IDN variants, which would seriously impact the public interest in the pertinent user communities. We wish to highlight two areas of particular concern in the Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) requirements: *(1) Domain Name Matching* Language communities have requested that TMCH services factor IDN-script trademarks involving variants and that ICANN consider adopting community-based solutions to address this issue since October 2011. Despite concerns raised by language community experts in the TMCH Implementation Assistance Group (IAG), the domain name matching requirements of the TMCH still does not take into account trademarks in IDN scripts involving variants. Variant matching is critical for certain languages and particularly for the Chinese language. To illustrate, when a trademark holder registers a simplified Chinese word-mark and not its traditional equivalent, the TMCH will accordingly generate only one trademark record. The new gTLD registries are obliged to offer sunrise services and trademark claims for trademarks recorded in the TMCH. Without variant matching requirements in place, only that registered simplified word-mark will be eligible for trademark protection. This leaves the traditional word-mark equivalent open for cybersquatting. Given that both simplified and traditional writings of the word-mark are deemed identical by the Chinese community (and by norm few trademarks are registered in both writings), ruling out the un-registered writing by not allowing variant matching would make the TMCH completely useless to Chinese trademarks. *(2) Domain Name Bundling* The TMCH requirements specifically prohibit any registry from implementing “variant or bundling rules” and allocating domain names under such “variant or bundling rules” prior to the conclusion of the Sunrise Period. Such a restriction would exclude the accommodation of any solution for IDN trademarks involving variants during the sunrise period at the TLD level, even though registries may be willing to address the variants through their own registration management and at their own expense. *A More Open and Flexible TMCH Model* Trademarks have a very important function of safeguarding the public interest by identifying the source of goods and services. If left unaddressed, the deficiencies of the TMCH model design may likely cause serious public confusion and result in market chaos. In principle, the At-Large community does not support over-extensive trademark protection measures. However, we do strongly believe that ICANN should treat all trademarks equally, irrespective of the characters of the trademarks, and that users from all language communities should be protected from confusion equally. In September 2012, the ALAC statement on the TMCH called for a “more open and flexible model” that can address our community’s concerns regarding the limitations of a uniform model, which would be applied to all gTLD registries irrespective of their differences and competencies. We believe that new gTLD registries require a more open and flexible TMCH model to be successful and we strongly urge ICANN to move away from a model that is centralized, inflexible and unfriendly to variants. In light of the considerations above, the ALAC urges the ICANN Board to call for a more open and flexible TMCH model. Towards this end, we urge the Board to support a community-based, bottom-up solution for TMCH implementation and to ensure that the IDN variant issue is addressed before the TMCH begin providing services to the new gTLD registries. We understand that addressing the IDN Variant issue in a holistic way requires the development of Label Generation Rules (LGR) for the Root Zone, which experts and Staff have projected to require a minimum of 12 months. We appreciate that the LGR development requires conscientious effort to maintain the security and stability of the Internet, but we are also mindful that the business and practical requirements of new gTLD applicants, especially from developing economies, call for urgent implementation. To expedite the development of appropriate solutions, the ALAC recommends that the Board request from the ICANN CEO an interim mechanism that can yield such solutions efficiently and on an urgent basis. This may require additional Staff with the appropriate linguistic capabilities working in tandem with community members with relevant expertise. It may also require a consideration of expediting the LGR process for the Han script. We understand that in the general case, the handling of variants is a complex issue. However, for variant cases that are well defined and understood, such as the case of the Han script, ICANN should proceed on a fast-track basis to include variant support in the TMCH in time to accommodate the delegation of the appropriate TLDs. END

8 11

Nominations for APRALO Leadership roles term July 1 2013 to 30 June 2015 currently open...
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr 01 May '13

01 May '13

Dear list as you all know we currently have open an election process for some leadership positions in our RALO (this Election cycle was opened during the Beijing meeting at our GA on April 9th)... I note that at this stage no nominations have yet been received and therefore wish to formally propose the following Nominations for the open positions:- For *APRALO Chair*: *Holly RAICHE* => position is currently held by Holly. Noting Holly 'stepped up' from her Vice Chair position to complete the term of Charles Monk when he entered a Government role as an elected official, and whose current term ends on 30 June 2013; Further noting that she is eligible for re-election... if appointed her new term starts 1 July 2013 and ends 30 June 2015. For *APRALO Vice Chair* (one of 2 selected for 2 year terms in alternate years): *YJ Park *=> this position is currently held by YJ and the current term ends on 30 June 2013. Noting that YJ was appointed to complete the term of Vice Chair that Holly held and which opened when she become Chair of APRALO, and also noting that YJ is eligible for re-election ... if appointed like Holly her new term starts 1 July 2013 and ends 30 June 2015. NOTE ALSO: APRALO Secretariat: Currently held by the Internet Society - Hong Kong (Edmon Chung and Pavan Budhrani). According to the APRALO Organizing Documents, the Secretariat position is “appointed”. Current term end on 30 June 2013. Re-affirmation of appointment has been our good practice and so to continue, should occur prior to 30 June 2013., and indeed could happen either on-list or preferably formally as a motion as an Agenda item at our June Meeting and I propose that there is no change in this current appointment of our Secretariat arrangement and that the Internet Society of Hong Kong continue in this role at this time... and advise the list that I am happy to 'Put such a Motion' to the June APRALO Meeting. -- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (ISOC-AU Chapter ALS). *Cheryl Langdon-Orr ... **(CLO)* http://about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr

5 7

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Nomination process for APRALO
by Holly Raiche 30 Apr '13

30 Apr '13

Thanks Silvia And I have forwarded this to everyone in APRALO - to ensure that anyone who wants to nominate/second knows the process. Holly On 30/04/2013, at 9:12 AM, Silvia Vivanco wrote: > Hello Holly, > > The APRALO By laws do not contain any provision regarding this, however, > anyone from an accredited ALS can nominate and second. I have copied my > colleagues and CLO who may have more institutional memory on APRALO > practices in this regard. > > Thank you! > > Silvia > > Silvia Vivanco > Manager, At-Large Regional Affairs > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > Telephone: + 1 (202) 570-7119 > Fax: +1 (202) 789-0104 > Cell/Mobile: +1 (202) 735-7011 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Holly Raiche [mailto:h.raiche@internode.on.net] > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 7:07 PM > To: Silvia Vivanco > Subject: Nomination process for APRALO > > Hi Silvia > > I"m just checking, but my understanding is that the nominator should be the > rep from an ALS - as should the seconder. What are the rules around who can > stand? > > Thanks > > Holly

2 1

Fwd: [Webinar] The threat of cyber-attacks
by Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro 26 Apr '13

26 Apr '13

See details of webinar below: Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: DiploMail <webinars(a)diplomacy.edu> > Date: April 26, 2013, 8:02:40 PM GMT+12:00 > To: <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [Webinar] The threat of cyber-attacks > Reply-To: DiploMail <webinars(a)diplomacy.edu> > > > Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. > > April Internet governance webinar > The threat of cyber-attacks > Dear friends, > > We would like to invite you to our upcoming IG webinar, on The threat of cyber-attacks, on Tuesday 30th April at 10:00 GMT, hosted by Mr Vladimir Radunovic, Diplo's cybersecurity expert. > > The recent DDoS attack on Spamhaus, dubbed 'the biggest ever of such kind', shook the Internet community. Not only was it carried out on a very large scale, but the ripple effects created by this attack were similarly alarming. Many different aspects are involved: the costs to mitigate the attacks; the fact that an attack can affect millions of online users directly or indirectly; and the fact that attacks can target not only private entities but important structures like Internet eXchange Points (IXP). > > During the webinar, Mr Radunovic will discuss this attack in detail, as well as other aspects related to cyber-attacks and cyberwarfare: > > How big and real is the threat of cyber-attacks on a similarly large/larger scale? > Generally, what are the consequences of these attacks? > How concerned should states and institutions be about these attacks and threats of similar attacks? > Are there any preventive measures that can be taken by the online community? > Participants will be able to ask topic-related questions during the webinar. To participate, fill in this registration form. Participation is free; registration is required. > > > Looking forward to e-seeing you! > The IG webinars team > > Follow us on Twitter | Find us on Facebook | Forward to a friend > Copyright © 2013 DiploFoundation, All rights reserved. > You are receiving this email because you subscribed to our igwebinars mailing list. > > unsubscribe salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com from this list | update your subscription preferences >

1 0

APrIGF Seoul 2013 - Call For Workshop & Themes
by Pavan Budhrani 23 Apr '13

23 Apr '13

Dear members of APRALO Please take note of the following *Call for Workshops & Themes* *Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum* *APrIGF 2013, Seoul, South Korea* *4-6 September 2013* *www.aprigf.asia* <http://www.aprigf.asia/> * * Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF) has been held annually since 2010. The Forum serves as a platform for aggregating IGF related discussions and collaborations at the regional level, and ultimately advances the development of Internet governance in the Asia Pacific. APrIGF 2013 will be hosted by Korea Internet Governance Alliance (KIGA) and supported by the local secretariat Korea Internet Security Agency (KISA) and APrIGF secretariat DotAsia Organisation respectively. The APrIGF Program Committee calls for your participation in developing the Forum agenda in an open process by submitting your topics of interest and workshop proposals. We encourage all members of the Asia Pacific community to join the program development process in the following ways: *• Submit a workshop proposal* *• Comment on the proposed theme:* Towards a Better Internet: A more Secured, Convenient, Vibrant, Equivalent, and Desirable Internet *• Suggest sub-themes or topic of interests* *• Join the program committee discussions (Multi-stakeholder Steering Group)* *Each workshop will be 90 minutes with time for Q&A *and should present the proposed issue in an inclusive manner, incorporating a multi-stakeholder perspective. * * *Send your proposals of not more than 500 words with the below format to proposals(a)aprigf.asia.* * - Title of the Workshop - Thematic area of interest - Specific Issues of Discussions - Expected format and Target panel members - Full name and contact details of the workshop organiser The deadline for submission is May 18 (Sat) 23:59 UTC. If you are interested to follow any news and updates about APrIGF and discuss relevant issues, you may subscribe to the mailing list discuss(a)aprigf.asia via this link<https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_discuss> . If you are interested to join the program committee of Seoul 2013 discussions (Multi-stakeholder Steering Group), please send email request to sec(a)aprigf.asia with a brief introduction of your expertise and represented entity. We welcome any Internet-related organisation that wishes to become a supporting organisation or sponsor. Please contact sec(a)aprigf.asia for more information. * *Secretariat of APrIGF* *DotAsia Organisation Ltd.*

1 0

Fwd: [WHOIS-WG] IMPORTANT - RSVP required / ICANN News Alert - Webinar: WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations - Implementation Update
by Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro 23 Apr '13

23 Apr '13

FYI Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> > Date: April 23, 2013, 12:14:44 PM GMT+12:00 > To: <whois-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Subject: [WHOIS-WG] IMPORTANT - RSVP required / ICANN News Alert - Webinar: WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations - Implementation Update > > > > Dear All, > > Please register via email to alice.jansen(a)icann.org by Tuesday, 23 April – 23:59 UTC to receive the dial-in details. We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with login and dial-in details. > > Thank you. > 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 > > One World, One Internet > > > News Alert > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-16apr13-en.htm > > Webinar: WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations - Implementation Update > 16 April 2013 > Join ICANN Staff for an update on ICANN's ongoing and planned activities to fully enforce the existing WHOIS policy for generic top-level domains. > > Webinar Details > > Date: Wednesday, 24 April > Time: 15:00-16:30 UTC > Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois/ > > You are invited to an update on ICANN's ongoing and planned activities to fully enforce the existing WHOIS policy and contractual conditions for gTLDs. These activities address ICANN's obligations to support access to accurate gTLD WHOIS data and are consistent with objectives included in the WHOIS Policy Review Team's recommendations. ICANN Staff will walk you through, and respond to questions on, the following projects: WHOIS as a strategic priority; RAA amendments; data accuracy/access; compliance and automated tools; internationalized registration data; WHOIS information portal; and outreach and communication efforts. Staff also will provide an overview of the efforts undertaken by the Expert Working Group to develop a proposed blueprint for gTLD directory services. > > Please join this webinar on Wednesday, 24 April at 15:00 UTC (duration 90 minutes). The meeting will be run in an Adobe Connect room with a slide presentation. The session will be conducted in English. > > Participants will have the opportunity to offer comments and ask questions during the Q&A section. During the course of the webinar, these may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you cannot join the live session, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. > > Please register via email to alice.jansen(a)icann.org by Tuesday, 23 April – 23:59 UTC to receive the dial-in details. We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with login and dial-in details. > > Background documents: > > Blog post on WHOIS & What's to Come > WHOIS policies and provisions > Board Resolution on WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations > WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations [PDF, 1.44 MB] > > > > _______________________________________________ > WHOIS-WG mailing list > WHOIS-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-wg > > WHOIS WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Whois+Policy

1 0

IMPORTANT - RSVP required / ICANN News Alert - Webinar: WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations - Implementation Update
by At-Large Staff 23 Apr '13

23 Apr '13

Dear All, Please register via email to alice.jansen(a)icann.org by Tuesday, 23 April 23:59 UTC to receive the dial-in details. We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with login and dial-in details. Thank you. 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 One World, One Internet ICANN News Alert <http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-16apr13-en.htm Webinar: WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations - Implementation Update 16 April 2013 Join ICANN Staff for an update on ICANN's ongoing and planned activities to fully enforce the existing WHOIS policy for generic top-level domains. Webinar Details Date: Wednesday, 24 April Time: 15:00-16:30 UTC Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois/ You are invited to an update on ICANN's ongoing and planned activities to fully enforce the existing WHOIS policy and contractual conditions for gTLDs. These activities address ICANN's obligations to support access to accurate gTLD WHOIS data and are consistent with objectives included in the WHOIS Policy Review Team's recommendations. ICANN Staff will walk you through, and respond to questions on, the following projects: WHOIS as a strategic priority; RAA amendments; data accuracy/access; compliance and automated tools; internationalized registration data; WHOIS information portal; and outreach and communication efforts. Staff also will provide an overview of the efforts undertaken by the Expert Working Group to develop a proposed blueprint for gTLD directory services. Please join this webinar on Wednesday, 24 April at 15:00 UTC (duration 90 minutes). The meeting will be run in an Adobe Connect room with a slide presentation. The session will be conducted in English. Participants will have the opportunity to offer comments and ask questions during the Q&A section. During the course of the webinar, these may be submitted using the chat function of Adobe Connect. If you cannot join the live session, the recording of the session will be made available shortly after the meeting. Please register via email to alice.jansen(a)icann.org by Tuesday, 23 April 23:59 UTC to receive the dial-in details. We will send you an e-mail reminder before the event with login and dial-in details. Background documents: * Blog post on WHOIS & What's to Come <http://blog.icann.org/2013/03/whois-whats-to-come/> * WHOIS policies and provisions <http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/whois-policies-provisions> * Board Resolution on WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations <http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/prelim-report-08nov12-en.htm > * WHOIS Policy Review Team Recommendations <http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/whois/final-report-11may12-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.44 MB]

1 1