Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Fee waiver / reduction?

[Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

If we considered a fee waiver for listed organizations, that would in your view 
cover all 4 mechanisms or just a subset (eg as Alan stated for objections only)?

Thanks,
Thomas

=============
thomas-rickert.tel
+49.228.74.898.0

Am 26.04.2013 um 01:02 schrieb Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> We could start with the same list that people want to use for special 
> privileges.
> 
> A fee waiver for anyone the GAC says is worthy.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 25 Apr 2013, at 16:34, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Doing that would then would require that we agree on criteria for who would 
>> be eligible for fee waivers and that would put us into another process that 
>> would be fairly subjective and possible require a mechanism for applying the 
>> criteria.
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx]
>>> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 5:14 PM
>>> To: GNSO IGO INGO (gnso-igo-ingo@xxxxxxxxx)
>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-igo-ingo] Fee waiver / reduction?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> personal view
>>> 
>>> while I am loathe to agree to any a-priori special reservation privileges 
>>> for
>>> anyone,
>>> 
>>> I am supportive of fee wavers for everything so that the existing RPMs can 
>>> be
>>> used by qualifying charities and fellow public service organizations  
>>> without
>>> further expense.
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> On 25 Apr 2013, at 14:13, Thomas Rickert wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> All,
>>>> thanks again for a constructive discussion yesterday. I would like to 
>>>> obtain
>>> some feedback from you regarding the question of a fee waiver for the
>>> beneficiaries of protections.
>>>> 
>>>> Fee waivers (and standing) could be considered for:
>>>> 
>>>> - Objections against applications for gTLDs / Top Level
>>>> - Applications to the TMCH
>>>> - URS
>>>> - UDRP
>>>> 
>>>> As you know, we have structured our discussion yesterday along the proposed
>>> recommendations by the RySG. A fee waiver was not part of that set of
>>> recommendations and I would like to better understand whether the WG
>>> members wish / do not wish such recommendation to be added.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Thomas
>>>> 
>>>> =============
>>>> thomas-rickert.tel
>>>> +49.228.74.898.0
> 
>