Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call held on Monday, 8 August 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-08aug16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-16may16-en.mp3> <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-new-gtld-subsequent-09may16-en.mp3http://au...> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/_ACsAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Monday, 8 August 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group, Monday, 08 August 2016 16:00 UTC. Jeff Neuman:All - We will start in 3 minutes Jeff Neuman:1 minute.... Karen Bernstein:Good day everyone Richard Padilla:Hi all Christa Taylor:yes Paul McGrady:yes Christa Taylor:lol Emily Barabas:connecting with her now Freida Tallon .Sky:Hello All Avri Doria:i cannot hear. will have to do something. i heard during check. Paul McGrady:We are. A few more days Phil Marano (Mayer Brown):IPC membership call tomorrow, most likely a topic for discussion. Cecilia Smith:I reached out to the Chair o& Policy coordinator and they said they would send out, but I haven't seen anything. I will follow up this morning. Nathaniel Edwards:Apologies for late arrival Paul McGrady:Happy to do so. Will post to Council list. Jeff Neuman:@Avri - Yes. We have good participation on the lists, but not necessarily during the calls Cecilia Smith:Correction, BC will send out to group for discussion, not sure if/when response will be returned to WG. Donna Austin, Neustar:The RySG comments support the introduction of new gTLDs in the future. Jeff Neuman:Can we post a link to the RySG comment to show their response Julie Hedlund:@Jeff: It is on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/59645660/RySG%20comments%20.... Karen Bernstein:Isn't the whole purpose of this to decide whether there should be second round? Karen Bernstein:Ok Christa Taylor:The different categories could also tie in to application fees Carlton Samuels:@Christa: +1 VANDA:@carlton , yes agree too Carlton Samuels:@Avri: There was some baseline attributes to geographic, just not itemised in one place in the GB Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: This WG would be remiss if we didn't address the idea/concept/category generally called "community". Avri Doria:Community was one of the categories in the AGB. we may want to discuss how it was done, but it is not new as a category Carlton Samuels:@Avri: Soo true. But both ALAC and the GAC had concerns about definition and structural elements. VANDA:guess due the problem some community had with the previous work on colecting support ... Robin Gross:I also have concern about the way the concept of "community" has evolved at ICANN. Donna Austin, Neustar:I just found this text in the RySG response as part of the reply to 2c: We do not believe that regulated and highly-regulated TLDs should be treated as a separate category of TLDs from the application process as these categories were solely derived from GAC Advice and not self-designation by the applicant. Paul McGrady:Will dial in VANDA:Ia gree with Donna Robin Gross:I believe we should consider doing away with community as a category in the future, in part, due to its arbitariness. Robin Gross:arbitrariness Paul McGrady:On the phone line now, ready to try again. Carlton Samuels:@Jeff: Definition on community for clarity is the ALAC's position Karen Day-.JMP:+1 Paul Steve Coates:For generics, I think we should spend some time discussing definitions. Paul McGrady:Thanks Avri Donna Austin, Neustar:@Jeff, which is the same for regulated and highly regulated. Paul McGrady:But Spec 11 didn't exist when the AGB was published. The issue here is notice to new applicants, rather than surprises. VANDA:my point shouls be informed but not established as a category Paul McGrady:I'm agnostic on what we call it, but if closed generics need not apply, we just need to be up front about it. VANDA:@paul - agree Jeff Neuman:@paul - Agreed the rules need to be clear Paul McGrady:Avri - agree. Laura Watkins:Agree and think that makes sense but the only caution I would say that we should avoic being too prescriptive - there should be options for applicants that don't fit into set categories Donna Austin, Neustar:I think they're called Donna Austin, Neustar:generic Donna Austin, Neustar:sorry Avri, I was being flippant Paul McGrady:This is a big issue. Can we agree to talk to indecision today pending additional responses from the other Cs and SGs? Christa Taylor:+1 Donna Grace Mutung'u:rounds should be more predictable...maybe every three -five years to allow those catching up with the Internet opportunity? Donna Austin, Neustar:yes, an ongoing process Donna Austin, Neustar:Correct Jeff Jeff Neuman:I agree it is two points Kurt Pritz:Thiis is the current policy: "All applicants for a new gTLD registry should therefore be evaluated against transparent and predictable criteria, fully available to the applicants prior to the initiation of the process. Normally, therefore, no subsequent additional selection criteria should be used in the selection process." VANDA:+ 1 Donna, ongoing process to allow specially developing countries to be more prepared. Carlton Samuels 2:The A/C room has been flacky since morning for me VANDA:for me too.... Donna Austin, Neustar:No objection from me. Good to have the discussion. Steve Coates:Terrible time logging in today. Carlton Samuels 2:I thought we were looking at engagement in the applciation process? That is VERY early in the process, no? Carlton Samuels 2:@Donna: That would be helpfu but in the ALAC's view the engagement process takes on a wider perspective; we need more discussants from different places in the circle. Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: The latter, during application process Carlton Samuels 2:@Avri: Yes Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):indeed Avri Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):I suspect ALAC would agree with this point Donna we were under impressed with thd 'outreach' VANDA:we had NO outreach in this south region here.. I personally did some and got some new applicants but nothing really organized outreach. Paul McGrady:Outreach can always be improved. Donna Austin, Neustar:RySG comment: Notwithstanding the ultimate goal of a continuous process, the RySG does not support the notion of placing unnecessary limitations on future applicants. This would be anti-competitive, has the potential to inhibit innovation: and, as such, is antithetical to the purpose of introducing new gTLDs. Paul McGrady:Should we ask Staff if they can handle 10,000 applications? Mary Wong:This would be a question for Akram/GDD :) Paul McGrady:Thanks Mary! Thanks Avri! Paul McGrady:I predicted 596. Boy, was I wrong, Nathaniel Edwards:I agree. Enforcement/community/objections costs will be out of control for 10,000+ applications. Paul McGrady:Great call today Avri. Thanks for keeping us on track. VANDA:very productive emeting, thanks Avri! Christa Taylor:Thank-you Avri! Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO):Thx everyone, bye for niw then... THANKS Avri more taalk whn it is NT 0330 Richard Padilla:bye all Cecilia Smith:Thanks you! Karen Day-.JMP:goodbye thanks Freida Tallon .Sky:Thanks and Bye all