August 2019 - Gnso-newgtld-wg

Post call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call / Tuesday, 27 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Tuesday, 27 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/WKujBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members can join the call, observers can listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. Please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> if you would like to change your status from observer to member. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0

SLA Monitoring (SLAM) Statistics
by Steve Chan Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Dear WG Members, During the course of discussions, particularly as it relates to RSP pre-approval and most recently, registrant protections, WG members have asked for updated statistics on the Service Level Agreement (SLA) Monitoring program within ICANN. Attached, please find the latest report. A few contextual notes that may help your digestion of this information: The statistics are on a per TLD basis for each month. In some months, there are spikes in the number of DNS and RDDS failures. Usually, these spikes are a caused by a failure in an RSP that serves a large number of TLDs. On the 4ht slide, you will see several failures that reached EBERO thresholds but in the vast majority of cases, the failures did not trigger an EBERO event. As has been shared previously, this is likely because ICANN Org worked with the registry to resolve the event and/or there were minimal domains under management. In addition, members asked for information around Pre-Delegation Testing (PDT), which I believe is now an element of the broader Registry System Testing (RST). Please see the below response from GDD: “Additionally, on the PDT/RST side - ICANN org has neither compiled nor published summary data regarding Pre-Delegation Test results from the 2012 round. Testing data was tracked and managed by IIS, the pre-delegation testing vendor. Such testing data, was not provided to ICANN org as part of the service delivery efforts. However, based on ICANN org management of the Pre-Delegation testing processing since 2012, we can share anecdotal information based on the collective recollection of org and vendor staff. These anecdotal results includes: 1. Most TLDs received follow-up questions regarding their PDT testing submission (similar to initial evaluation Clarifying Questions) 2. Approximately one quarter of TLDs tested required extended testing beyond the standard 2 to 3 week testing cycle. Some of these tests extended up to 12 weeks. 3. Based on the flexibility of extended testing and the assistance provided by the PDT vendor to TLD operators, fewer than 10 TLDs required a second full PDT testing cycle.“ Hopefully you all find this information helpful. If you have questions or concerns, especially for GDD, please let us know. Best, Steve Steven Chan  Policy Director, GNSO Support Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536  Email: steve.chan(a)icann.org Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]

2 1

Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Closed Generics and the 2012 Round
by Michele Neylon - Blacknight Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Jeff Please add me to this small group. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com> Date: Monday 26 August 2019 at 13:27 To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com>, "gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Closed Generics and the 2012 Round Thanks all. We have already got a number of people signed up for the group. I expect substantive discussions on this topic to start this week. So, it is not too late to join. But remember that if you join, the expectation is that we will attempt to find a compromise solution that we all can live with (if possible). You can view the member list for the small group here: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/Members+New+gTLD+%3A+Topic+of+Clo… Please allow a day or two to pass before seeing your name on the list if you just volunteered over the weekend or today. We will not be talking about Closed Generics in our next meeting tomorrow (late tonight for some of us). Jeff Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus D: +1.703.635.7514 E: jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces(a)icann.org> On Behalf Of Jeff Neuman Sent: Friday, August 23, 2019 11:01 AM To: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Closed Generics and the 2012 Round All, There has been a lot of discussion in the past 24 hours or so on the applicability of our work on the 2012 applications. Some have expressed concerns about the “fairness” of establishing a policy or new procedures for subsequent rounds when Closed Generics were not allowed in 2012. The applicable Board Resolution covering Closed Generics required the 2012 applicants for Closed Generics to do one of three things. Applicants could have withdrawn their applications completely, signed the then-current Registry Agreement which did not allow Closed Generics, or could have deferred their applications for consideration in a subsequent round. As we covered on the call on Thursday, all of the applicants chose either to convert their applications to open TLDs or withdraw their applications completely. There were NO applicants that elected to defer their applications to any future round. Therefore, although in theory we could have had some issues that we needed to address involving applicants in the 2012 round, the reality is that we do not have any such issues. To address the arguments about fairness of any new policy recommendations on applicants from the previous round, all we can say is that we need to focus on what the right policy should be first without the consideration of the fairness or unfairness to previous applicants from having different rules. If we as a group determine that the right policy is something other than what happened in 2012, then it will by up to the GNSO Council to either set up a new group to deal with that issue or to refer the issue to this group at a later date. But for now, as some have stated, that issue is out of scope for our group. The reality is that there are many things that this group is considering which could produce results that may treat new applicants differently than previous round applicants. Some of those changes may be favorable to the new applicants and some less favorable. The same is true with respect to previous applicants. If we did not make any changes to policy or implementation for fear of the impact on previous or new applicants, no changes would ever be made. The point is that we need to decide what is the right thing to do, point out to the GNSO Council the potential impacts, and then leave it to the Council on what the next steps should be. Finally, all requests for data or information from ICANN staff or any outside third party should go through the Working Group Leadership team. No working group members should request information directly without Leadership’s review. Leadership reviews all outstanding action items, including requests for information, and makes a decision on what is necessary and what is feasible. We consider all of these requests seriously and weigh the pros and cons of getting that data, including time, resources and cost. Thanks for your cooperation and let us know if you have any comments or questions. Jeff Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive Suite 600, McLean VA 22102, USA M: +1.202.549.5079 D: +1.703.635.7514 E: jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com> www.comlaude.com<http://www.comlaude.com/> [cid:image001.jpg@01D55C2C.C06FDA90] ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com> ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>

1 0

Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 27 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 23, 2019

Aug. 23, 2019

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for the call on Tuesday, 27 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrou… a. String Similarity (page 21) b. IDNs (page 26, time permitting) 3. Schedule for ICANN66 4. AOB If you need a dial out or would like to submit an apology, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

1 0

Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 22 August 2019
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 23, 2019

Aug. 23, 2019

Dear Working Group members, Please see below the notes from the meeting on 22 August 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-08-22+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Pr…. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Notes and Action Items: Actions: ACTION ITEM re: Closed Generics – Establish a small team to continue the discussion on a dedicated email list. Notes: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest: -- Tom Dale was appointed to the NomCom for the GNSO. -- Justine Chew was appointed to the NomCom for the ALAC representing Asia / Australia / Pacific Islands See: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2019-08-19-en. 2. Review of summary document – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrou… Closed Generics (page 14): -- The purpose of this document is not to restate what is in the public comment summary that is linked in the third bullet as the subgroup be public comment analysis. -- Many people will advocate on one side or the other and in between. -- Summary document is to make sure all positions are represented in a summary fashion, but not to restate what is in the public comment analysis. Background: -- The GAC identified a non-exhaustive list of strings in the current round of the New gTLD Program that it considers to be generic terms where the applicant is proposing to provide exclusive registry access. -- Board to an action but only for that round and left it to this PDP to set policy. -- The Board said that what happened in 2012 on Closed Generics shouldn’t set a precedent for future rounds. -- Exclusive registry access is synonymous with closed generics. -- There was a public comment period and a large number of comments were received with a wide diversity of views. In a resolution<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2015-06…> passed on 21 June 2015 the Board determined that remaining applicants from the 2012 round who had applied for non-contested strings and were seeking to operate Closed Generic TLDs would have the following options: ● submit a change request to no longer be an exclusive generic TLD, and sign the current form of the New gTLD Registry Agreement; ● maintain their plan to operate an exclusive generic TLD. As a result, their application will be deferred to the next round of the New gTLD Program, subject to rules developed for the next round, to allow time for the GNSO to develop policy advice concerning exclusive generic TLDs; or ● withdraw their application for a refund consistent with the refund schedule in the Applicant Guidebook. In effect, through this resolution, the ICANN Board banned Exclusive Generic / Closed Generic TLDs in the 2012 round. Question: How many applicants selected the second option, to maintain their plan to operate an exclusive generic TLD. As a result, their application will be deferred to the next round of the New gTLD Program, subject to rules developed for the next round, to allow time for the GNSO to develop policy advice concerning exclusive generic TLDs? Based on staff research, the 5 applications referenced in the text above are: * HOTELS<https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationde…> - Booking.com B.V. * GROCERY<https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationde…> - Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. * DVR<https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationde…> - Hughes Satellite Systems Corporation * DATA<https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationde…> - Dish DBS Corporation * PHONE<https://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationde…> - Dish DBS Corporation All five submitted change requests to question 18 (i.e., mission/purpose of the proposed gTLD) and have since been delegated. Therefore, the answer to the question above appears to be zero. -- But the Board went on to say that it wanted the GNSO to consider this topic in a PDP on subsequent new TLD procedures. The Board was specific in saying that it was not setting policy, but a temporary solution until the GNSO community could consider this issue in more detail. So, the GNSO Council has charged this PDP WG with considering the impact of closed generics and future policy. -- The working group generally agrees that some form of policy guidance should be drafted on this topic if it's possible to reach consensus on the path forward. -- But there continue to be different strongly held views on the policy goals. -- So, there is no high-level agreement on this point. -- So, this discussion is critical to see if we can get to a high-level agreement. Discussion: -- Default was what was done for the first round. -- Do we take the view that anything not banned in the AGB is allowed? Or what is not expressly allowed in the AGB is not allowed? -- There were a lot of comments opposing Closed Generics. -- But many of those comment were from competitors to those applicants seeking Closed Generics because they didn’t want their competitors to have exclusive use. Outstanding Items - New Ideas/Concerns/Divergence Option 1: Formalize GNSO policy, making it consistent with the existing base Registry Agreement that Closed Generics should not be allowed. Option 2: Allow Closed Generics but require that applicants demonstrate that the Closed Generic serves a public interest goal in the application. Potential objections process could be similar to community-based objections. Option 3: Allow Closed Generics but require the applicant to commit to a code of conduct that addresses the concerns expressed by those not in favor of Closed Generics Discussion: -- Not appropriate to isolate certain responses that were provided in the public comments in the summary document. Not presenting the background just as facts. -- PTO.GOV site speaks to what is a generic. -- Thick back to what people were afraid of back then when they advocated for closed generics and how we can work around it. -- The question is for those who oppose Closed Generics are there any conditions where you could see allowing them? -- Need to create a separate email list to consider Closed Generics.

1 0

Post call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call / Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 22, 2019

Aug. 22, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/VqujBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members can join the call, observers can listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. Please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> if you would like to change your status from observer to member. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0

Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 22 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 20, 2019

Aug. 20, 2019

Dear all, Please find below the proposed agenda for the call on Thursday, 22 August 2019 at 03:00 UTC for 90 minutes: 1. Welcome and Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Review of summary document – See: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q6_DxsCvSA_3B7ArncO2U4tWNY3vH7Wi4nINrou… a. Closed Generics (page 14) b. String Similarity (page 20) (time permitting) 3. AOB If you need a dial out or would like to submit an apology, please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

3 2

CURRENCY CODES: WAS RE: Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 12 August 2019 at 15:00 UTC
by Jeff Neuman Aug. 20, 2019

Aug. 20, 2019

Thanks Christopher. Wouldn’t the offering of financial and foreign exchange services be regulated by law in the unlikely circumstance that one were offering these services as part of their TLD. Using .top as an example, have we seen these issues? And with .mad, .mop, etc., why wouldn’t the requirement to abide by applicable law cover the concerns? Reserving strings should always be the exception and not the rule in terms of handling issues. Especially when balancing against human rights, freedom of speech, etc. Geographic names has been one of the outliers of this rule given concerns expressed by the governments and as an issue of national sovereignty. In the US (and I can only speak for the US), we have the notion of narrowly tailoring any restrictions to the least amount of regulation necessary to address concerns. For example, there are concerns of causing panic in large public spaces. Rather than stating, for example, that no one can speak in a movie theater, we prohibit only that type of speech that could cause harm or disorderly conduct (namely, the yelling of fire when there is none). With trademark law, we don’t ban all use of words matching trademarks in any fashion, just terms used in commerce that are likely to cause confusion with a trademark, etc….. So, assuming this is in fact an issue, wouldn’t there be less restrictive means to address this issue than having a reservation those strings? NOTE: I am not making a judgement one way or the other, but just trying to stimulate conversation. ALL – Please weigh in on whether you think this is an issue, whether it needs to be addressed, and if so, how? Discussion on this topic will be tomorrow (Thursday) during our weekly call along with all other reserved names (OTHER THAN GEONAMES) Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: lists(a)christopherwilkinson.eu <lists(a)christopherwilkinson.eu> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 3:05 PM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com> Cc: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>; gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 12 August 2019 at 15:00 UTC Dear Jeff: Thankyou. Noted. I look forward to the discussion of those Reserved Names (there are others). Meanwhile, may I say that I do not see this as a question of ‘confusion’ as you have described it. Rather we are dealing with the risks to the global financial systems that could arise from independent platforms based on a portfolio of ISO4217 alpha 3 codes as TLDs offering financial and foreign exchange services outside the remit of existing official structures, snd policies. I gather recently (actually, today) that we are not alone in addressing these kinds of issues: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3414401&download=yes However, the opportunity of such developments is for others to determine. All I am proposing is to protect ICANN’s reputation and independence from any regulatory issues arising from otherwise unauthorised use of ISO4217 codes as TLDs as platforms for financial and foreign exchange services. Accordingly, I propose that the ISO4217 codes be reserved and protected in the same way as the ISO3166 alpha3 codes. Policies for the eventual release of those codes as TLDs could be developed in consultation with the interested parties which - by and large - are still outside the ICANN community and the GNSO. Best regards toy all CW On 12 Aug 2019, at 15:21, Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> wrote: Thanks Christopher. I understand the scope of how foreign exchange rates and transactions are in the world. I guess what I was really asking was about the scope of the problem and what issues are being caused now that would necessitate the reservation of those codes (or protection of those codes) at the top level. So, for example, “CUP” is the 3-letter code for the Cuban Peso, “MOP” for the Macao Pataca, “MAD” for the Moroccan Durham, “NPR” for the Nepalese Rupee (also in US is known by most people at the National Public Radio, “RUB” for the Russian Ruble, and “TOP” for the Tonga Pa’anga (NOTE: This is already a TLD). In the last example, has there been any noted cases of confusion of harm attributable to the match of the TLD and the currency code. So when we get to the topic of reserved names in the full working group, this subject can be brought up, and the group can understand the scope of the problem and the necessity (if any) to protect those 3-letter codes. Thanks. Jeffrey J. Neuman Senior Vice President Com Laude | Valideus 1751 Pinnacle Drive , Suite 600 Mclean , VA 22102 UNITED STATES T: +1.703.635.7514 M: +1.202.549.5079 CONFIRMATION OF ORDERS: Please note that we always confirm receipt of orders. To assist us in identifying orders, please use the word ORDER in the subject line of your email. If you have sent us an order and have not received confirmation on the same working day (PST) it is possible that your order has not been received or has been trapped by our spam filter. In this case, please contact your client manager or admin(a)comlaude.com<mailto:admin@comlaude.com> for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: lists(a)christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists@christopherwilkinson.eu> <lists(a)christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:lists@christopherwilkinson.eu>> Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2019 8:17 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>>; Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman(a)comlaude.com<mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com>> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org>; CW <mail(a)christopherwilkinson.eu<mailto:mail@christopherwilkinson.eu>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Proposed agenda - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 12 August 2019 at 15:00 UTC Dear Jeff : During our most recent conference call, you asked me to quantify the scope of the Foreign edchange Transactions and the businesses supported by protected geographical indications. As I said at the time, I do not have the time or resources to conduct a thorough study, but a few minutes’ Goodle Search gives rise to confirmation of the importance of these economic activities. 1. Foreign exchange transactions (ISO 4217 currency codes.) « According to the Bank for International Settlements, the preliminary global results from the 2016 Triennial Central Bank Survey of Foreign Exchange and OTC Derivatives Markets Activity show that trading in foreign exchange markets averaged $5.09 trillion per day in April 2016. » https://www.statista.com/statistics/247328/activity-per-trading-day-on-the-… As I understand these FOREX markets, (a) a significant proportion of these transactions are automatic outcomes of small shifts in the exchange rates and (b) the transactions involve the electronic identification of the buying and selling parties and currencies. Subject to confirmation or contradiction I believe that the ISO 4217 alpha3 codes are widely used for that purpose. This is why I have argued in WT5 and in the PDP that these currency codes should be reserved by ICANN until there is a clear agreement with the international Central Banks (e.g. through IMF or BSI) as to whether these codes could be delegated and to which entities, not excluding themselves. 1. Geographical Indications (GIs) The IPR rights in GIs are well established in many jurisdictions. Their economic significance is considerable in the regions most concerned. At short notice, I only have an EU source to quantify their economic importance. From an 2011 EU Court of Auditors report (There are others): https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_ECA-11-41_en.htm “The geographical indications (GI) scheme aims to protect product names which are registered as Protected Designation of Origin or Protected Geographical Indication, whose overall wholesale value is estimated at € 15 billion (per year-cw). The scheme also provides a potential economic opportunity for farmers and producers of food and can have a positive impact on the rural economies of the EU’s regions, as well as offer an impetus for safeguarding local culture and tradition and provide consumers with the opportunity to be more aware of the origin of the products they consume.” Granted that fifteen billion per year is less than five trillion per day. But I nevertheless consider that since the GIs are protected by applicable local law, ICANN should reserve all such names in the agreed languages. and regulate eventual delegation to authorised Registries. I trust that this preliminary response to your question is helpful Regards Christopher Wilkinson On 9 Aug 2019, at 14:33, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> wrote: ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com/> ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>

6 9

Post call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call / Monday, 19 August 2019 at 20:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 19, 2019

Aug. 19, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 19 August 2019 at 20:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/VKujBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members can join the call, observers can listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. Please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> if you would like to change your status from observer to member. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0

Post call / New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call / Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 20:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 16, 2019

Aug. 16, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Thursday, 15 August 2019 at 20:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/UqujBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript As a reminder only members can join the call, observers can listen to the recordings and read the transcript afterwards. Please email gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> if you would like to change your status from observer to member. For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/RgV1Aw>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0