I agree with this approach. 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 M +1 773.677.3305 trac@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> | www.gtlaw.com<http://www.gtlaw.com/> | View GT Biography <https://www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachtenberg-marc-h> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [US News Law Firm of the Year 2020 and 2022 for Trademark Law badge] From: SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of samlanfranco@gmail.com Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 5:59 PM To: alexander@schubert.berlin Cc: trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [SubPro-IRT] Topic 21.1: Geographic Names - Updated Alexander writes: "How about the following: If the government entity withdraws their letter of support before the application deadline – such letter would be illegible to support the application? We have such provision in the AGB for later stages of the geo gTLD life cycle – just not for the application phase. That would work, too." This has the same problem as my suggestion. It still requires a second government action. What if the application process required the applicant, at the time of submission, to attest that there have been no material changes that would compromise the letter of support? If there were none, we'll and good. If there were changes, the applicant would have compromised their application with a false submission. There could be a grey area here, but when are there not risks of grey areas. Just a thought. Sam Lanfranco Internet Elder, Internet Ecologist, 416 816-2852 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster@gtlaw.com, and do not use or disseminate the information.
