I also have a conflicting obligation.
I agree with Jeff on point 1 below. I am fine with the fees for Community Applications and think that the bar should be high to prevent gaming.
Best regards,
Marc H. Trachtenberg
Shareholder
Chair, Internet, Domain Name, e-Commerce and Social Media Practice
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
77 West Wacker Drive | Suite 3100 | Chicago, IL 60601
T +1 312.456.1020
<image001.png>
<image002.png>
Sending apologies for the call later. I have a conflicting obligation. That said, I put comments into the TLD Type document, mostly on the unexpected added fees for Brands and Communities. These make no sense to me at all.
1. Brands - We are saying they have to pay for an evaluation to see if they are eligible to get a .brand. And then it says they have to pay for a Spec. 9 Code of Conduct Exemption as well....even though the Code of Conduct exemption is embedded in Spec 13 (Section 3). Thus, if they qualify to be a brand TLD, then there is No Need for a separate evaluation OR a separate fee? Sure, if they fail eligibility, then you can ask the applicant if it wants the Spec 9 evaluation and then it pays for that. But if it passes eligibility, then no fee and no separate code of conduct evaluation.
2. Communities - Wow, we are really hitting them hard. Not only are they going have to pay for the CPE, which can be a good chunk of change, but then we are also going to charge them for the privilege of putting their policies into Spec 12. Right now, a provision was added that states that after a Community passes CPE, it needs to pay a Registry Commitment Evaluation fee so that ICANN can figure out what can go into Spec 12.
--