Folks, The discussions on this topic and additional documents offered further confirm the role and interest of WHO in this objection. It is clear from the previously submitted applications by WHO that they have specific interest in the .HEALTH string. Why they did not apply this time is beyond me (per John L. they would have received a discount). If they had applied they would likely be the most obvious candidate. However, at this point to take a "if I can't have it, no one can" approach is not an appropriate use of the community objection. It would be a mistake to support these objections and may reflect badly on ALAC later if they go forward. This objection came in very late and along with four other objections which made it impossible to conduct full research. If the RG had access and knowledge of all this information at the time, the objection may not have passed. We have until midnight UTC (7PM EST) today to submit advice to ALAC, my advice is that it is not in our interest to move forward on these objections. -Garth -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 11:42 PM To: Eric Brunner-Williams Cc: NARALO Discussion List Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection The WHO is obviously aware of the process, having applied before. It could have applied in this round as a community application, and had an immediate leg up on others, but chose not to. Why it would apply then and not now is puzzling, but it has made the decision to not contend for the string and other entries should not be enjoined simply because they are not the WHO. And as interesting as the 2000 application was, the fact remains that it was not granted. If its existence is not well known, the reasons for its rejection at that time are even less known. In any case, that was then and this is now. There is no WHO application for .health at this time. There may indeed be sensible reasons to advance some or all of objections against the Latin-string applications(*), but putting the string on hold while waiting for the WHO to (maybe) apply for it at a later round is not one of those reasons. Nobody -- with the possible exception for dot-brands based on invented words -- is merely entitled to any string. And given the conduct of the WHO and other IGOs in the current GNSO working group regarding non-profit name blocking, I actually have little reason to believe that their interests in gTLDs are any less self-serving than the for-profits. (*) Based on recent feedback from Hong, Rinalia and Cheryl, I oppose advancing any objections on the Chinese variant. - Evan -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------