Dear Emily

I feel that the text reflects our San Juan discussions, and hence should be maintained.

At the same time, I would like to know what is exactly meant with “of strings that are not current or future countries or territories” and how this would affect strings corresponding to countries and territories?

Best

Jorge

Von: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> Im Auftrag von Emily Barabas
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. August 2018 16:07
An: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org
Betreff: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Additional Input Requested - "The ICANN community may want to consider. . ."

Dear Work Track members,

On yesterday’s call, there were a number of comments about the following suggested text in draft recommendations 2-8:

“The ICANN community may want to consider whether a future process should be established to determine if, when, and how specific interested parties, such as relevant government authorities, may apply for country and territory names.”

The purpose of this text was to acknowledge that some WT members expressed that there should be a way for country and territory names to be delegated, while also keeping in mind that others felt that this issue is not within the remit of Work Track 5 or the GNSO.

Some support was expressed for deleting this sentence.

One alternative to this sentence was proposed, by Carlos:

“ICANN may consider applications by specific interested parties, such as relevant authorities, of strings that are not current or future countries or territories.”

The Work Track leadership team would like to hear from the group if there are objections to deleting the text or if there are other edits that the group would like to suggest. Please reply on this thread.

Kind regards,

Emily

Emily Barabas | Policy Manager

ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

Email: emily.barabas@icann.org | Phone: +31 (0)6 84507976