Dear Sunrise Sub Team members, Just a gentle reminder to review the Google Doc for Sunrise Charter questions (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NMlQRUyoMD271Xxu3_GqwkSeTGs2huW_5DqzgX1m...) and either enter your comments or send them to this mailing list by COB in your time zone tomorrow, 19 April. We hope the notes and action items (below) are helpful to you in your review of the first Sub Team call from last Friday, and in preparing for this week’s discussion. Please note also that, as part of the initial Sub Team work, it is expected that the Sub Team will propose a timeline for approaching all the finalized Sunrise questions – for your convenience, please find attached the latest Working Group Work Plan which staff will update following your and the other Sub Teams’ deliberations. Thanks and cheers Mary From: Mary Wong <mary.wong@icann.org> Date: Monday, April 17, 2017 at 10:45 To: Amr Elsadr <amr.elsadr@icann.org>, "gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org" <gnso-rpm-sunrise@icann.org> Subject: Re: Update on Action Items and Notes from the Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call - 14 April 2017 Dear all, As with the Trademark Claims Sub Team, staff has marked up the status of the various Action Items from the first Sub Team call in blue (below). Please let us know if you have any questions! Subject: [Gnso-rpm-sunrise] IMPORTANT: Action Items and Notes from the Sunrise Registrations Sub Team Call - 14 April 2017 Action Items: 1. Staff to compile information on context/origin of each question by the next Sub Team call (e.g. how much support for a particular question in the past, or was it one suggestion) Done – see Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NMlQRUyoMD271Xxu3_GqwkSeTGs2huW_5DqzgX1m... 2. Sub Team agreed to "bunch" similar questions together (but not necessarily redrafting - see notes on adding footnotes to facilitate clarity) 3. Staff/Sub Team Leadership to set up a Google Doc for first pass of consolidation of questions - second pass for refinement of questions Done. 4. Sub Team members have 5 days (Wednesday, 19 April) to send suggestions to the mailing list, to be captured by staff in the Google Doc, and circulated to the Sub Team by Friday, 21 April. Please feel free to insert your comments directly into the Google Doc, or if you prefer to send as email to this list, staff will capture those suggestions on your behalf. Please also consider the questions that staff had sent to both Sub Teams, to which Paul McGrady had provided an initial response: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/2017-April/001605.html. Notes: 1. Lori Schulman selected as Sub Team Chair 2. Discussion on Charter questions for Sunrise Registrations · What questions can be consolidated/refined? · Are premium names relevant to this Sub Team or even the Working Group? Premium names not considered RPMs o From AC Chat: I think the issue for premium names is around setting of pricing which effectively circumvents the sunrise and how do you address that as a brand owner if you have no route of objection o If pricing of premium names is interfering with the ability to use RPMs (such as trademark holders registrations during sunrise), might be within scope of the working group to discuss o Pricing during sunrise makes the benefits of sunrise economically difficult for trademark holders to take advantage of o Sub Team can go through questions - refine so that they make sense - use liaisons to new gTLD sub pro PDP to coordinate how they are addressed o Instead of redrafting questions, bucket questions together including those that may be similar or identical o Investigate instances when premium names interfere with sunrise registrations to determine the extent to which it may actually be problematic · From AC Chat: Brand owners are not the only party with "special rights" in accordance to Sunrise, GEO TLDs need to deliver domains for public services/streets/monuments e.t.c. to the Municipal Entity of the City... for example · Adding context to questions may be helpful in addressing them (suggestion by staff - staff can investigate origins of questions being considered) - contextual information could be to determine/clarify if questions address longstanding problems identified by the community vs a question that came up once, and was included o From AC Chat: I'm not sure it makes sense to research where a Charter question came from. What's more relevant is the level of interest it merits within the WG o Add notes/footnotes to questions that may be redundant or where meaning is not clear for clarification - as alternative to redrafting · ACTION ITEM: Sub Team members to review questions for redundancy, and make suggestions on-list (use Google Docs) 3. Preference expressed to hold next Sub Team call next Friday at UTC 14:00 (60 minutes with ability to extend to 90 minutes) to give Sub Team enough time to consolidate/refine questions - ACTION ITEM: Confirm next call day/time on-list ACTION ITEM: Aim for Wednesday for initial comments on question, so that staff can prepare and circulate document before Friday