Re: Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw
Dear all, Thank you, Mark, for your feedback. A quick recap: following some initial feedback from the IRT [Mark, if I recall your one of the one’s who spoke up on this point], ICANN org had looked into implementing a solution without the need to buy a ticket. Subsequently, we presented to the IRT a method that would forego the entire raffle idea, based also on implementation guidance 19.2, which suggests “to explore ways to assign a prioritization number during the application process without the need for a distinctly separate drawing event.” Please note, from an org perspective a non-draw would certainly make things easier and reduce costs for the program. However, after presenting this alternative to the IRT (I will try and dig out the recording later), the IRT noted that Affirmation 19.1 requires a repeat of the draw – notwithstanding the guidance of 19.2. Therefore, we (staff) have reverted to the draw as the way to determine prioritization. [Mark, I believe you were not on this particular call]. I hope this is helpful context. Very best. Lars From: trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Reply-To: "trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com" <trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com> Date: Monday, 16 December 2024 at 17:52 To: Elisa Busette <elisa.busetto@icann.org>, "subpro-irt@icann.org" <subpro-irt@icann.org> Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Re: Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw My primary question in case I can’t attend tomorrow is why do we need to include the requirement to purchase a ticket? This is where the legal risk comes from, in particular with respect to the draw being deemed an illegal lottery and/or requiring a permit. I am fine with the concept of a priority draw and making it optional – but there should be no cost to purchasing a ticket. It should not cost much to operate the draw and there will be plenty of application fee money to cover whether incremental cost there is for this. 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 [gtlaw.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.gtlaw.com/__;!!PtGJab4!_eAG2HVfSUvWJoW...> | View GT Biography [gtlaw.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachten...> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [cid:image002.png@01DB4FEB.604253B0] From: Elisa Busetto via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 9:14 AM To: subpro-irt@icann.org Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw *EXTERNAL TO GT* Dear all, Please find here<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1T5Gap0fzeOTWN...> the proposed language for “Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw”. A pdf version of the document is posted on tomorrow’s meeting page<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/community.icann.org/x/gwEiFg__;!!DUT_TFPx...>. Best regards, Elisa ________________________________ 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.
Affirmation 19.1 also requires that the ticket be paid for? Why can’t we have a raffle where the ticket is free? This would eliminate a lot of risk. 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] [cid:image001.png@01DB4FB1.09BC1B50] From: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@icann.org> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 11:51 AM To: Trachtenberg, Marc H. (Shld-Chi-IP-Tech) <trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com>; Elisa Busetto <elisa.busetto@icann.org>; subpro-irt@icann.org Subject: Re: [SubPro-IRT] Re: Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw Dear all, Thank you, Mark, for your feedback. A quick recap: following some initial feedback from the IRT [Mark, if I recall your one of the one’s who spoke up on this point], ICANN org had looked into implementing a solution without the need to buy a ticket. Subsequently, we presented to the IRT a method that would forego the entire raffle idea, based also on implementation guidance 19.2, which suggests “to explore ways to assign a prioritization number during the application process without the need for a distinctly separate drawing event.” Please note, from an org perspective a non-draw would certainly make things easier and reduce costs for the program. However, after presenting this alternative to the IRT (I will try and dig out the recording later), the IRT noted that Affirmation 19.1 requires a repeat of the draw – notwithstanding the guidance of 19.2. Therefore, we (staff) have reverted to the draw as the way to determine prioritization. [Mark, I believe you were not on this particular call]. I hope this is helpful context. Very best. Lars From: trachtenbergm--- via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>> Reply-To: "trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com>" <trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com<mailto:trachtenbergm@gtlaw.com>> Date: Monday, 16 December 2024 at 17:52 To: Elisa Busette <elisa.busetto@icann.org<mailto:elisa.busetto@icann.org>>, "subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>" <subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>> Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Re: Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw My primary question in case I can’t attend tomorrow is why do we need to include the requirement to purchase a ticket? This is where the legal risk comes from, in particular with respect to the draw being deemed an illegal lottery and/or requiring a permit. I am fine with the concept of a priority draw and making it optional – but there should be no cost to purchasing a ticket. It should not cost much to operate the draw and there will be plenty of application fee money to cover whether incremental cost there is for this. 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 [gtlaw.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.gtlaw.com/__;!!PtGJab4!_eAG2HVfSUvWJoW...> | View GT Biography [gtlaw.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.gtlaw.com/en/professionals/t/trachten...> [Greenberg Traurig Logo] [cid:image006.png@01DB4FB1.09B08290] From: Elisa Busetto via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org>> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2024 9:14 AM To: subpro-irt@icann.org<mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org> Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw *EXTERNAL TO GT* Dear all, Please find here<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1T5Gap0fzeOTWN...> the proposed language for “Order of Application Processing and the Prioritization Draw”. A pdf version of the document is posted on tomorrow’s meeting page<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/community.icann.org/x/gwEiFg__;!!DUT_TFPx...>. Best regards, Elisa ________________________________ 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<mailto:postmaster@gtlaw.com>, and do not use or disseminate the information.
participants (2)
-
Lars Hoffmann -
trachtenbergm＠gtlaw.com