Thanks John for this e-mail. We discussed this comment and a few questions were raised during the call last night. 1. "ALAC will not support a new gTLD round...." Can you please confirm that the ALAC position refers only to the opening of the application window as opposed to ICANN and the community taking steps to prepare for the opening of the next application window. When something like this came up previously with respect to the NCAP studies being a dependency for the next round, Justine in the attached e-mail, explained: "The Subsequent Procedures WG can conclude its work, and implementation may proceed, BUT EITHER ICANN may not launch the application window until the NCAP study(ies) are completed and any recommendations resulting from those study(ies) are addressed in implementation OR ICANN may launch the application window and start the evaluation process, but no TLD may be delegated until the NCAP Study(ies) is/are completed and any recommendations resulting from those study(ies) are retroactively incorporated." Can you please explain if this should be interpreted similarly - namely, that implementation can proceed in ALAC's view? 1. "full implementation of CCT....recommendations are fully implemented." As you are no doubt aware, the CCT recommendations contain a number of levels. Some are labeled as pre-requisites to the launch of the next round, others are not. * Is the ALAC only referring to those recommendations that are deemed to be pre-requisites? Or is the ALAC actually referring to ALL recommendations regardless of how they were labeled? * In addition, not all of the recommendations were accepted by the ICANN Board for immediate implementation. Is the ALAC referring to only the ones that were accepted by the ICANN Board or to literally all of the recommendations regardless of whether they were accepted by the ICANN Board. 1. "full implementation of...RPM Recommendations are fully implemented" * Is the ALAC only referring to Phase One of the RPM work or to both Phase One (New gTLD protections) and Phase Two (UDRP)? * The GNSO RPM PDP Working Group leaders represented to the GNSO Council that they only believed that Phase One needed to be implemented by the time the first new gTLD in the next round enters into an Agreement or is delegated (not sure there was agreement on which one). But in either case the GNSO has discussed the possibility of moving forward with SubPro (assuming it finishes first and has consensus recommendations accepted by the Council, etc.) even if the RPM Phase 1 Work is not done. So, this is really related to Question 1 (see above). 1. Finally, your e-mail refers to "ALAC's position as asserted to ICANN GDD at ICANN65." * Is that position documented? And if so, can you please send the position statement and rationale to this PDP Working Group for our review? * When was the ALAC position communicated to ICANN GDD? * Is there a transcript, presentation material, etc. of that meeting and can they be sent to this Working Group for Review? I know these seem like a lot of questions, but I am assuming the e-mail you sent us was a brief summary of the conclusion of the ALAC position and it would be helpful for us to have all of the detail. 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@comlaude.com for confirmation that the order has been received and is being processed. Thank you. From: Gnso-newgtld-wg <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of John Laprise Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 10:20 PM To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org Cc: 'ALAC Members' <ALAC-members@icann.org>; 'ICANN At-Large Staff' <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] ALAC position on newgTLD subpro Hi everyone, Just a useful reminder of ALAC's position as asserted to ICANN GDD at ICANN65: ALAC will not support a new gTLD round until full implementation of CCT and RPM recommendations are fully implemented. Best regards, John Laprise, Ph.D. NARALO ALAC Representative ALAC Vice Chair-Policy ________________________________ 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>