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

DOODLE / APRALO December Monthly call
by At-Large Staff Aug. 26, 2013

Aug. 26, 2013

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 May 13, 2013

May 13, 2013

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 May 3, 2013

May 3, 2013

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 May 2, 2013

May 2, 2013

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 May 1, 2013

May 1, 2013

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 April 30, 2013

April 30, 2013

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 April 26, 2013

April 26, 2013

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 April 23, 2013

April 23, 2013

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 April 23, 2013

April 23, 2013

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 April 23, 2013

April 23, 2013

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

Next APRALO call
by At-Large Staff April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

Dear All, Due to the recent ICANN Beijing meeting, the APRALO April monthly call initially scheduled on Tuesday 23 April 2013 at 0500 UTC has been cancelled. The next APRALO monthly - May - call is scheduled on Tuesday 28 May 2013 at 0500 UTC. The agenda and call details will be sent out closer to the date. 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

3 2

Fwd: [Rigf_discuss] Reminder: Call for Workshops & Themes for APrIGF Seoul 2013
by Cheryl Langdon-Orr April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

Reminder FTI.... CLO from my Mobile phone ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "APrIGF Secretariat" <sec(a)aprigf.asia> Date: 22/04/2013 9:03 PM Subject: [Rigf_discuss] Reminder: Call for Workshops & Themes for APrIGF Seoul 2013 To: <discuss(a)ap.rigf.asia> Cc: * Call for Workshops & Themes Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum APrIGF 2013, Seoul, South Korea 4-6 September 2013 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.* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Address: 15F, 6 Knutsford Terrace, Tsim Sha Tsui, Hong Kong Tel: +852 3520 2635 ︳Fax: +852 3520 2634 ︳http://www.aprigf.asia<http://www.dot.asia> _______________________________________________ Rigf_discuss mailing list Rigf_discuss(a)web2.dotasia.org https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_discuss

1 0

Fwd: German Federal Internet Commission Report
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

Dear All, As you can imagine some of the continuing issues permeating through increasing reliance on the Internet are issues of Data Protection and Privacy. One of the latest developments in Europe, specifically Germany is the release of the report by a Commission that was established by their Parliament. A Special Internet and Digital Society Commission has made numerous recommendations and one of it includes the establishment of the Internet Commissioner in Germany. To read the Article, visit: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/special-commission-calls-for-in… To read the Final Report visit: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/125/1712550.pdf Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

4 4

Report back from Beijing
by Holly Raiche April 22, 2013

April 22, 2013

Hi Everyone My notes on some of the meetings at Beijing are below. I don't have more notes since I was in the Chair for many of the meetings. First, a reminder of elections for APRALO - dates are below and Matt - could you please send a link so that people can nominate whomever and acceptances of the nominations can be recorded. Next, at this stage, the only matter out for comment is the list of questions from the ATRT2 - the link is on the policy page. For those following the Whois issue, there is a webinar in the next couple of days - check the ICANN site. There will also be a discussion later in the week on the ALAC/RALOs budget for FY2014. We have already applied for funding to attend the IGF in Bali - and after initial discussion, the request for funding for 3 will go ahead - for a panel on IDN variants. We will also put in a smaller application to attend the regional IGF in Korea - again on IDN variants. And one issue that caused a lot of discussion in Beijing was on individual membership. This should be an item for discussion at our next APRALO meeting. ( I am checking with Silvia but think we cancelled the April meeting since we had one in Beijing) What we can also discuss at the next meeting is some feedback on Beijing - what worked, what didn't, what else should we be doing. Holly ICANN 46 Monday 8 April Thick Whois GNSO Working Group (providing the GNSO Council with a policy recommendation on universal ‘thick’ Whois) looking at the following elements: response consistency, stability, accessibility, impact on privacy and data protection, cost implications, synchronization and migration, authoritativeness, competition in Registry services, existing WHOIS applications, data escrow and Registrar Part 43 WHOIS requirements. Began with a brief explanation of what ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ whois means. For thick, registrar collects data on the registrant, the domain and various contacts, and provides the information to the registry. For thin registries, only the domain data published – but all three data types retained. The WG has reached consensus on most issues – but not all. The issue for this session: privacy. Specifically, looking at the privacy implications for the Registrants who have registered their information in the thin model with the expectation that only domain data would be captured at the Registry during a transitional period where they’ve registered their name in a jurisdiction where there are strong privacy protections in local law? And now that data is going to be published in a Registry where the local law is different. The issue for registrants may arise if they deal with a registrar in a ‘privacy-friendly’ country with strong privacy laws, but the registry is in a jurisdiction with far less stringent privacy laws and registrant data is then made publicly available when all registries are ‘thick’. Middle East Strategy : The meeting talked to strategies that are being worked on to improve achieve three goals: · Foster two-way engagement between ICANN and the broader Internet community in the region; · Build strong and competitive domain name industry in the region; · Promote multistakeholder Internet governance mechanisms in the region. Strategic Focus areas are: · DNS security and stability · Domain name industry · Internet governance ecosystem In comments, the CEO of AusRegistry made suggestions including the need for metrics (such as number/percentage of registrations per population, registrations for businesses, number of gTLDs, ccTLDs, and talked of the need to promote local content as a driver. Multi-Stakeholder Roundtable: First session was on the new gTLDs. Speakers included Jeremy Malcolm, Consumers International, Peter Nettlefold, ViceChair, GAC, Zahid Jamil, Business Constituency, GNSO, Maguy Serad, ICANN Compliance. Malcolm: Focus on end users- names they use, not have. Issues for consumers include the possibility of phishing, software incompatibilities, unclear expectations from the new names. Overall, the impact is likely to be relatively minor – a don’t know, don’t care attitude. Nettlefold: Taken the view that they aren’t keen to object outright, but concerns include issues of defensive registrations, whether there is an implied level of trust with strings. On PICS, there was a need to identify the goal of commitments made in applications. On compliance, there are issues of enforceability, who can raise concerns, who is notified, and what are the enforcement mechanisms. Jamil: Are three stakeholders: the end user, the registrant and the trademark holder. All three should be protected. It is important that confusion is avoided, includingwhether there are IP risks attached to the name. What about scripts other than ASCII, and what about words that are similar? – is nothing in the Trade Mark clearing house to deal with those issues. On PICS, the current obligations are on registries – but what about registrars. Further, the RAA akkiws a oattern of abuse, with no mechanism to deal with it. Finally, developing countries do not have mechanisms to deal with the issues and maya become soft targets. Serad: Compliance has been identifying the gaps in PICS and are building a readiness plan. There will be proactive monitoring for compliance. On enforceability, there is a lack of clarity on whether they are contractual obligations. Wednesday 10 April Whois Working Group Review of documents published Since then, have been additional negotiations, and has been agreement in principle to additional issues Cautions: · Has been a 4year process and there is a level of anxiety about the final text · The specification on privacy/proxy has been condensed · What about verification of the true registrant using a privacy/proxy service Thursday 11 April APRALO Meeting · Engagement with RIRs – especially APNIC – be aware of events involving RIRs · New groups, including new gTLD outreach · Need for feedback on ATRT2 · Is survey on ICANN image · Is a need for a youth session or youth forum as a bridge between users and ICANN · Needfor briefing sessions · Issue of individual membership · Elections: (for APRALO Chair – Holly’s term ends 30 June, for APRALO Vice Chair (YJ’s term ends 30 June) and for Secretariat – Edmon and Pavan – term ends 30 June) o Nominations are from 9 April to 3 May o 4 May – 10 May – acceptances by nominees o 17 May – 7 June: Elections o 1 July – Newly elected leaders’ terms begin

1 0

Fwd: Welcome to the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group
by Jurisonline in April 21, 2013

April 21, 2013

Dear APRALO and Holly, As discussed on the closing day of the APRALO meeting at Beijing I am forwarding the invite for " Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group" Regards N. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nirmol Agarwal <nirmolagarwal(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 7:31 AM Subject: Fwd: Welcome to the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group To: Jurisonline in <jurisonlineindia(a)gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> Date: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 6:54 AM Subject: Welcome to the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group To: "nkagarwal(a)jurisonline.in" <nkagarwal(a)jurisonline.in> Cc: "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org> Hello Nirmol, Thank you for your interest in joining the Locking of a Domain Name subject to UDRP Proceedings Working Group. You will be added to the mailing list shortly and should receive further details on how to complete your statement of interest, one of the requirements for joining a GNSO Working Group. For further information about the WG's activities to date, please visit the WG workspace: https://community.icann.org/x/xq3bAQ. You may especially find the WG charter (https://community.icann.org/x/ma-bAQ) and background documents (https://community.icann.org/x/na-bAQ) section of interest as you prepare. As you know, the WG has published its Initial Report for public comment (see https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-15mar13-en…) and is expected to resume its deliberations on 2 May to review the comments received and start working on finalising its report for submission to the GNSO Council. The WG typically meets on a weekly basis on Thursday's at 14.00 UTC. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. With best regards, Marika Sr. Policy Director ICANN -- CAUTION: PLEASE READ OUR "TERMS OF USE" BEFORE RELYING UPON ANY ADVISE TENDERED HEREIN. NOTE THE ADVISE GIVEN HEREIN SHALL NOT BE ADMISSIBLE IN ANY COURT OF LAW IN INDIA OR ABROAD AND IS MERELY IN THE NATURE OF A PERSONAL OPINION AND DONOT HAVE ANY STATUTORY VALUE.

1 0

Message to ALSes in China
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro April 21, 2013

April 21, 2013

Dear All, Kindly accept my heartful condolences and warm thoughts and prayers as we hear of the devastation in the Sichuan Province from the earthquake. I wish you well in the recovery efforts. I am not sure if there are members of the ALSes located in the Sichuan province but I thought that it would be good to send a message anyway. Best Wishes, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 Blog: salanieta.blogspot.com

1 0

Fwd: [Finance-sc] Meeting Invitation / FBSC meeting in April- Urgent
by Holly Raiche April 19, 2013

April 19, 2013

Hi Everyone This is a reminder that this is the cut off for pressing our case for either the submission we developed for Bali IGF OR modifying it so that we attend both Korea and Bali (I have already herd from one person who sees our presence in Korea as important as Bali) So PLEASE - thoughts on our original submission - reminding all that we did frame our submission around a presentation on variant IDNs, with funding for 8 people to attend the Bali IGF Any modifications to that must reach me ASAP Holly Begin forwarded message: > From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> > Date: 19 April 2013 8:47:26 AM AEST > To: Finance and Budget SubCommittee <finance-sc(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Cc: At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Finance-sc] Meeting Invitation / FBSC meeting in April > > Dear FBSC members, > > please make a note of the call below. This is where we will discuss the > additional budget requests that will follow the standard track. I remind > you that it is your duty to liaise with your RALO and to remind them to > file their requests in time for this call. > > As a result, we will accept requests from RALOs until Monday 22 April > 23:59 UTC. > > PLEASE TELL THIS TO YOUR RALO. > > Kind regards, > > Olivier > > On 18/04/2013 20:56, At-Large Staff wrote: >> >> Dear All, >> >> Further to the Doodle poll, the next Finance & Budget Sub Committee (FBSC) >> call is scheduled on Tuesday 23 April 2013 at 1300 UTC. >> >> For various times, please see: >> http://tinyurl.com/cxq674o >> >> The draft agenda (TO BE UPDATED) and call details can be found at: >> https://community.icann.org/x/lQF-Ag >> >> Adobe Connect room: >> http://icann.adobeconnect.com/alacfinbud/ >> >> If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at >> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org. >> >> 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 >> >> >> On 27/03/2013 00:50, "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> wrote: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Further to today's call, please complete the Doodle poll to find a suitable >>> slot as placeholder for a FBSC meeting, week 22 April. >>> >>> http://doodle.com/mf54xr7g7z9t9w82 >>> >>> This Doodle poll will close on Thursday 28 March 2013 at 1500 UTC. >>> >>> Thank you! >>> Kind regards, >>> Gisella >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Finance-sc mailing list >> Finance-sc(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/finance-sc >> > > -- > Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD > http://www.gih.com/ocl.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Finance-sc mailing list > Finance-sc(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/finance-sc

4 5

Fwd: APRALO Community Request for FY14
by Holly Raiche April 18, 2013

April 18, 2013

Hi Everyone Finally, we have a FEW days to revise this application (there will be a final teleconference this coming Tuesday to finalise requests) So questions: The application is to attend the IGF in Bali from 22 - 25 October. Do we want to apply instead to attend the regional IGF in Seoul from 3-5 Sept, particularly since the issue of IDN variants is particularly acute for the APAC region, or possibly seek funding to attend both (but only 4 people travel to each) Next question - particularly to Rinalia and Edmon: we should be more specific about the languages/scripts that present the most challenge to the issue - so do we want pretty much the same range of discussants. If we are just applying for money to attend Bali, then we need to have languages outside of the APRALO region as well - so what should they be? I'd like a better idea of at least where people are coming from so we can put in more exact figures for travel. Any and all input welcome - but soon, so that I can participate in Tuesday's meeting with more information from all of you Thanks Holly

3 2

NomCom updates
by Siranush Vardanyan April 11, 2013

April 11, 2013

Dear APRALO colleagues, As I have mentioned during our last conference call, I will be sending you January Report card, which reflects the discussions, took place during NomCom January conference call. Please, see attached the report card. With this e-mail I also would like to remind you that there is open position for ALAC representative from Asia Pacific and Australia region, to serve for 2 years term as well as other positions, which can be applied by people from the region (attached I am sending you the leadership positions, which are currently open to apply). Please, think about applying by yourselves or recommend good candidates who can serve the best to the community. You can do your recommendations by sending the information directly to NomCom member/s or using the simple online recommendation process <http://nomcom.icann.org/suggest>. You can also advice us which regional event is important (besides those mentioned in the report card) for NomCom to do outreach activities prior to the deadline for submission, which is May 1st. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, related to NomCom activities. Thank you all for your support. Sincerely, SiranushICANN NomCom member from APRALO

1 3

Re: [APAC-Discuss] General Assembly & APRALO Meeting in Thursday
by Mahmoud Lattouf April 11, 2013

April 11, 2013

Sorry, I had to leave at 13:45 to join the public forum. Regards, Mahmoud Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> wrote: Dear ALSes, Please note that roll call (attendance) was taken at Tuesday's APRALO General Assembly and will also be taken at the Thursday APRALO meeting (1300-1400). If you did not make it to the GA or cannot make it for the Thursday meeting for any reason, please notify the APRALO Chair and At Large Staff so that your apologies/absence can be noted in the meeting record. Best regards, Rinalia _______________________________________________ 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

apologies
by Hong Xue April 11, 2013

April 11, 2013

Dear Holly, My apologies. I won't be able to join the monthly meeting at 13:00 today. My colleague, Jack Qiu, will represent CDNUA to join the meeting. BTW, Mr. Chaoran Xu, from At-Large@Chia, let me send in his apologies. Hong -- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China

3 2

[Today 10-12nn@Ball Rm 1] Youth Forum: Model ICANN Board Meeting
by Yannis Li April 11, 2013

April 11, 2013

Dear All. Would like to share with you the Youth Forum organized by NetMission this morning. The ambassadors together with some Beijing students will have a Model ICANN Board Meeting discussing about the Applicant Support Program. We hope you can join us and share some thoughts with us. Date: 11 Apr (Thu) Time: 10:00am-12:00nn Venue: Ball Room 1, 2nd Floor, Main Building of Hotel (Different from Convention Centre side) Thank you very much and look forward to seeing you there. Best Regards, Yannis Li NetMission.Asia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Address: 12F, Daily House, 35-37 Haiphong Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Hong Kong Tel: +852 5802 2500 ︳Fax: +852 5802 2502 ︳http://www.dot.asia

1 0

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Draft Statement on Compliance Issues within ICANN:@
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net April 10, 2013

April 10, 2013

iPads are frustrating - I had drafted a long reply which has now disappeared. So here goes fIrst, I share many of garth's concerns about I accuracy and the failure of compliance to act, for all the reasons of safety, security and consumer protection that are listed. That said, I cannot support this statement. For a start, wedo not have p.roof of why staff were dismissed and without it, what is said is almost defamatory. Next, we do not need to list instances of when inaccuracies were pointed out and, as far as, we know, action was not taken. It is enough to say that we are aware of instances when proven inaccuracies in Whois were drawn to compliance' attention with no apparent response. Finally, we should note that proposed changes to the RAA and related documents will place far greater responsibility for Whois accuracy on registrars, and we would expect that it will be accompanied by firmer action by compliance in future to ensure the accuracy of Whois data. As I have said, while I am a strong supporter of Whois accuracy and the role compliance should have been playing, I do not support this statement, as currently drafted, being made on behalfl of, alac or APRALO Holly > I would like to encourage the ALSes to support the statement and to > endorse putting it forward to the ALAC. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss [1] > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org [2] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] > http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fatlarg > e-lists.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fapac-discuss[2] > http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apr > alo.org >

3 3

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Draft Statement on Compliance Issues within ICANN
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net April 10, 2013

April 10, 2013

On Wed 10/04/13 2:38 AM , Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro(a)gmail.com sent: > Dear APRALO, > > Kindly find attached the draft statement for APRALO to consider > putting forward to the ALAC. > > As promised, I had also promised to attach Garth Bruen, NARALO > Chair's comprehensive paper on the issues raised. > > I would like to encourage the ALSes to support the statement and to > endorse putting it forward to the ALAC. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss [1] > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org [2] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] > http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fatlarg > e-lists.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fapac-discuss[2] > http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apr > alo.org >

1 0

Re: [APAC-Discuss] Draft Statement on Compliance Issues within ICANN
by h.raiche＠internode.on.net April 10, 2013

April 10, 2013

1 0