Recording, Attendance & AC Chat for New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team - Track 2 - Legal Regulatory Issues
Dear All, Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email and the AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues held on Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 20:00 UTC. <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__audio.icann.org_gnso_gns...> The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=Zx5BSTxHyuQ1k0kWFuUD3QLERQ-qmyNLKD4EitZvXhg&s=fiTp8y1l5mm5sFzpecZ7zxKgmETN4SeZxhzYTsQIgis&e=> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2 Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/2SC4Aw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 20 October 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear all, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues call on Thursday, 20 October 2016 at 20:00 UTC. Phil Buckingham:Hi Michelle , Steve , Im in ! Phil Buckingham:thanks . Should be an "interesting " next hour ! Jeff Neuman:Hello all Jeff Neuman:vtLD (Validated top Level domains) Gg Levine (NABP):NABP is participating Gg Levine (NABP):Absolutely! Jeff Neuman:.bank yes Jeff Neuman:.pharmacy, .ngo / .ong Jeff Neuman:.law Gg Levine (NABP):TLD in which regigrants must meet registry standards prior to use of the domain Alexander Schubert:.gay :-) Jim Prendergast:Jeff has them allmemorized Paul McGrady:On a flight now, so only able to contribute via chat today. Alexander Schubert:Not yet delegated Jim Prendergast:still in contention, isnt it? Alexander Schubert:Still in contention Steve Chan:CTAG Alexander Schubert:CTAG! Steve Chan:Community TLD Applicant Group Paul McGrady:@Jeff Neuman - I have missed a call or two due to a family issue. DId we decide to include the Terms & Conditions from the Guidebook into this group or will they be looked at in another group? Thanks! Jeff Neuman:We consider feedback from everyone Jeff Neuman:@Paul - Yes.....but have not looked at them yet Paul McGrady:Perfect! Thanks @Jeff. Phil Buckingham:kurt - can you speak up a little Kurt Pritz:pretty close Kurt Pritz:I am in a crowded spot. sorry Kevin Kreuser:justification is the right term, IMO, but I think it should be a high bar Jeff Neuman:@kevin - Why a high bar? Alexander Schubert:Do we talk Spec 5? Phil Buckingham:alexander - spec 5 later Alexander Schubert:So is this top level or second level? Jeff Neuman:@Alexander - both Alexander Schubert:Seemingly 2nd.... Alexander Schubert:BOTH? Alexander Schubert:Apples & Oranges? Jeff Neuman:We will need to consider both reserved names at the top level as well as those at the second level Kevin Kreuser:bc the justification for most changes requested to the RA in this round were not due to something special in the applicant or the category that the applicant lived, but instead were based on the business' own limitations. TM rights and for protections I think are an exception. Multiple agreements for registrars can also be difficult to implement Jeff Neuman:How are multiple registry agreements difficult for registrars? (I am not disagreeing, but want to flush this out) Jeff Neuman:@Kevin - If one registry agreement has a different indemnity provision than another....how would that affect registrars Jeff Neuman:(as an example) Kevin Kreuser:depends on what changes are permitted by category. if technical, which I hope would not be the case, could cause difficulties Kevin Kreuser:nevermind us, we're just chatting Jeff Neuman:Not sure why that is.....I will call in. Kurt Pritz:one part of the COI question might be whether the COI is stiil Kurt Pritz:required Kevin Kreuser:@Kurt, ICANN would welcome eliminating the COI itself, but is still going to want a way to fund EBERO Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Finally into the AC Been on the audio bridge only until now Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Someone should take a look at the transcript of the new gTLD session in Toronto. Many participants raised complaints and concerns about the COI. ICANN's responses seem unlikely to be different now, IMHO. Kurt Pritz:@Kevin. there are a lot of ways to skin that cat. For later substantive discussion Kevin Kreuser:absolutely Alexander Schubert:With reserved names we have to strictly distinguish between top and second level! Alexander Schubert:CWG Jeff Neuman:that was in 2006 Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Are you talking about the 2006 WG? Kevin Kreuser:@Kristina, ICANN is holding and managing LOIs and Data Escrow agreements for all of these TLDs. It's an administrative nightmare. I cannot imagine they wouldn't love to be rid of them, perhaps by way of insurance of some manner, taking a portion of the applicant fee and dumping into a pool, etc as an alternatives Steve Chan:FYI, the document is un-synced...as Michael just noted. Paul McGrady:Kevin, we went down the "insurance" path in Round 1 and it was rejected. Start ups are not the same risk footprint as .Brands. Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):@Kevin: I think Paul McGrady has some views on ICANN as an insurer (although I was super sick in Dakar and could be misremembering). Kevin Kreuser:Understand re insurance, point was more I believe they would be open to exploring better alternatives Jeff Neuman:https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_issue... Michael Flemming:Staff, could we make a note in the Notes to capture the discussion on COIs that is taking place in the chat so that we may use this as feedback and come back to this when we are ready to have more detailed discussion? Michael Flemming:please* Michael Flemming:A lot of constructive discussion. Thank you, everyone. Michael Flemming:Thanks! Jeff Neuman:We should also split the top level from second level Alexander Schubert:+1 Annebeth Lange:+ 1 Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):+1 Julie Hedlund:@Michael: I have copied it, but I'll note that it is redundant. The chat notes are captured separately by the Secretariat staff and is posted to the wiki. Alexander Schubert:And it Is split in the AG! Paul McGrady:@Kevin, lots can be done with the EBERO issue to drive out costs and uncertainty, thus reducing ICANN's involvement/risk. Alexander Schubert:Spec 5 is 2nd level, right? Michael Flemming:Yes Michael Flemming:Anything in the RA would refer to second level reservations Michael Flemming:...I believe Kevin Kreuser:some restrictions are at "all levels" Kevin Kreuser:country and territory, for exampel Jeff Neuman:I think we should take one by one Jeff Neuman:See what the policy recomendation was and then compare with what was done Steve Chan:Phil is discussing the existing Reserved Name Requirements (at that time) Annebeth Lange:And the Reserved Names report came in 2006 - not completely consistent with the AG Steve Chan:What is in the AC room is the recommendation table recommended for new gTLDs Michael Flemming:Yes, Phil is looking at the Roles of Reserved Names Table Jeff Neuman:The applicant Guidebook in Section 2.2.1.2.1 has the initial list of top-level reserved names Jeff Neuman:Then this section was added: 2.2.1.2.3 to cover red cross / olympics Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Indeed Annebeth that out of Synch is important to note Julie Hedlund:See the table at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_issue... Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):May I suggest that we start with what was in the AG and only revert back to the Reserved Names WG recommendations and the 2000/2003 Reserved Name requirements, as needed? Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):works for me Kristina Annebeth Lange:I agree Annebeth Lange:It has been a lot of discussion between the result of the Reserved Names WG recommendations and the result in the AG Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):+1 Jeff Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):+1 Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry):Is there anyone who thinks that we shouldn't have reserved names on the top level? Annebeth Lange:The AG should be the starting point here Kevin Kreuser:home Alexander Schubert:hiome? Alexander Schubert:Yap: home Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):4 Julie Hedlund:All: Just a time check. 2 minutes to the top of the hour. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):WT4 Heather Forrest:It seems to me that it would be helpful to have everyone in the group go back to the RNWG Report to understand the justifications reached by that group Jeff Neuman:@heather - yes please Annebeth Lange:And we have to remember that this was long time ago - before the AG that I think had input from more stakeholdergroups than RNWG Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Have to leave my next call is starting now Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Bye Paul McGrady:Thanks all! Annebeth Lange:Bye Alexander Schubert:Thanks! Jeff Neuman:@Annabeth - Agree, BUT we need to revise the policy so we need to understand the original policy Annebeth Lange:Absolutely, Jeff Heather Forrest:thanks everyone Robin Gross:thanks all, bye Alexander Schubert:Midnight :-) Robert Burlingame:Thank you. Bye. Annebeth Lange:Here too, ALexander Emily Barabas:Next call will be after ICANN57, invitation to be sent out
Dear All, Please find the attendance and recording of the call attached to this email and the AC Chat below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues held on Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 20:00 UTC. <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__audio.icann.org_gnso_gns...> The recordings of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar-23nov&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=8_WhWIPqsLT6TmF1Zmyci866vcPSFO4VShFqESGe_5iHWGlBLwwwehFBfjrsjWv9&m=Zx5BSTxHyuQ1k0kWFuUD3QLERQ-qmyNLKD4EitZvXhg&s=fiTp8y1l5mm5sFzpecZ7zxKgmETN4SeZxhzYTsQIgis&e=> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt2 Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/2SC4Aw[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_2SC4Aw&d=DQMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=PDd_FX3f4MVgkEIi9GHvVoUhbecsvLhgsyXrxgtbL10DTBs0i1jYiBM_uTSDzgqG&m=kd7nyRmbuLcYQaasE3P9lTgnpD-8LOsig00YtB0PnMY&s=X4NNCX6tsu8TgHFzZv82fdKMHlQNQNiiO8skh9Pk0SU&e=> Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for 15 December 2016 Nathalie Peregrine: Dear all, welcome to the call for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 2 – Legal/Regulatory Issues on December 15 2016 Jeff Neuman: Remember the default....if we get no comments otherwise, the assumption is that whatever is applicable today will be applicable in the future. So speak up if you have an issue :) Rubens Kuhl: I think IANA still deserves such reservation. Rubens Kuhl: It's a "household name" of sorts. Rubens Kuhl: As in the IANA label only, not all the IANA labels. Rubens Kuhl: Not able at this time. Rubens Kuhl: Example and ROOT-SERVERS are also worth keeping reserved, IMHO. Rubens Kuhl: ICANN is not worthy reserving. ;-) Rubens Kuhl: I might in a few minutes, just not now. Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: To reserve anything at second level, there should be a very good reason why. Why ICANN and IANA and not other international organisations? Jeff Neuman: @Annabeth - that is why ICANN took its name off the list Rubens Kuhl: IANA is not an organization, PTI is. IANA is similar to INTERNIC, a long-recalled name with a meaning. Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: Exactly :-) Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: That is true, Rubens. You have a point. Rubens Kuhl: It's also of note that we could move such names to being "LRO material", as in someone which is not RIPE applies for .RIPE, RIPE could file an LRO. Greg Shatan: The iana.org domain name is used for emails instructing changes to the Root Zone, and for the website on which critical information is displayed. PTI also owns iana.com and iana.net. Jeff Neuman: @Rubeattorneys that could make similar arguments :) Jeff Neuman: oops Jeff Neuman: I know IP attorneys that can make siilar arguments :) Jeff Neuman: szimilar Greg Shatan: My name used to be spelled Szatan.... Jeff Neuman: @greg - some may say that is fitting for you ") Rubens Kuhl: Example was also mentioned as an IANA label. Greg Shatan: Sz is pronounced "sh" in Polish so the name's the same.... Jeff Neuman: If a registry wants to reserve other versions of "example" it may do so on its own. But I see no reason why it should be protected by ICANN in all TLDs Rubens Kuhl: Use the Nihon-Go word then... ;-) Trang Nguyen: There was a reserved names working group. The final report is posted at https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/rn-wg-fr19mar07.pdf and may provide some background info. Greg Shatan: 5:19 am in Tokyo. Ouch.... Jeff Neuman: trang - that is in the Google Doc Trang Nguyen: Thanks, Jeff! Did not know that. Good that it's in the Google Doc. Greg Shatan: @Trang, my first ICANN WG. Brings back memories... Jeff Neuman: the 2009 "recommendation" is the result of the final report from the reserved names working group. Rubens Kuhl: ICANN disallowed even the hyphen. Jeff Neuman: @Rubens - only when the hyphen is in the 3rd and 4th position Greg Shatan: This probably requires an IETF RFC, I'm guessing. Greg Shatan: Symbols, that is. Rubens Kuhl: @Jeff, yes, but how we change ICANN behavior to follow policy ? Greg Shatan: Accountability! Alan Greenberg: I don't think we need to complicate our life any more than it already is. Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: Just a heads up for the Standardized Framework for Release of Two-Character ASCII Labels to avoid confusion with corresponding country codes, published yesterday. And a comment to IDNs - there have been instances where a 2-letter IDN is to similar to a 2-letter ASCII, so that it could not be accepted. It was on first level, but still it might appear on second level as well. Paul McGrady: Sorry to join late. Susan Payne: Having said which, am I right in thinking that we are holding over the "country code" issue to discuss in the wider context of geo names? Susan Payne: EP, EC, EU, AU, UN Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: As for geo-names, I think that should be kept at first level. GAC has been discussing 2-letter codes from ISO-list 3166 at second level, but I do not think they have - at least so far - been anxious about other geon Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: geonames at second level. Rubens Kuhl: I'll note that a registry might be allowed to not follow ICANN IDN Guidelines to the letter, by making an RSEP request that ICANN approves. So the guidelines are not the ultimate restrictions to it. Jeff Neuman: The third and 4th hyphens could in theory be used for other types of IETF protocols..but to my knowledge they have not been Jeff Neuman: yes] Rubens Kuhl: There were mentions in AGB as well. Rubens Kuhl: Yeap. Rubens Kuhl: Tell that to staff. ;-) Alexander Schubert: Jeff is right! Annebeth Lange, ccNSO: I am sorry, but I have to go. Anothe conference call waiting. Season's greetings to all. Rubens Kuhl: There is also transcription. Jeff Neuman: Thanks Michael. Good job so early in the morning for you Paul McGrady 2: Thanks! Alexander Schubert: Bye! Greg Shatan: Thanks, Michael. Well done. Bye all. Cecilia Smith: Bye! Rubens Kuhl: Thanks all, bye! avri doria: bye Christa Taylor: Thanks Phil Buckingham 2: Great job Michael = so complex . My call next - COI !
participants (2)
-
Michelle DeSmyter -
Nathalie Peregrine