<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Agenda and Materials for 2/8/12 Call
- To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Agenda and Materials for 2/8/12 Call
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 00:01:14 +0000
Please ignore this, I sent send too soon.
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 6:46 PM
To: Neuman, Jeff; gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] RE: Agenda and Materials for 2/8/12 Call
As promised, I inserted RySG feedback to date on the options below that we did
not discuss in today's meeting.
Chuck
From: owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:04 PM
To: gnso-iocrc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-iocrc-dt] Agenda and Materials for 2/8/12 Call
All,
Here is my proposed Agenda for the call on Wednesday. Please let me know if
you want to add anything else.
I. Schedule (including Costa Rica sessions)
II. Recap of Last Call
III. Feedback from Team/Constituencies/SGs/ACs on Top-Level
Options
IV. Next Steps / Prep for GNSO Call & Possible Status call with
GAC
I am a little disappointed by the lack of e-mails in the last two weeks on the
questions presented, so please come to the meeting ready to contribute.
Thanks.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Question 1. How should the Olympic and Red Cross/Red Crescent Terms be Treated
in the Current Application Round
GAC Proposal
At the top level, the request is to protect the Olympic and Red Cross terms
like the words "test" and "example" in the Applicant Guidebook (Section
2.2.1.2), extending those terms to multiple languages and receiving
consideration during the String Similarity review. Right now, these terms (in
not every language) is in the section entitled "Strings Ineligible for
Registration" and would not invoke String Similarity Review.
* Option 1: Recommend no changes to Guidebook and reject GAC Proposal.
This means that the names set forth in 2.2.1.2.3:
a) Are not considered "Reserved Names"
b) Applied for strings are not reviewed for similarity to the names in
Section 2.2.1.2.3.
* Option 2: Treat the terms set forth in Section 2.2..1.2.3 as
"reserved names" under Section 2.2.1.2. This means that:
a) the names are not available as gTLD strings to anyone; and
b) applied-for gTLD strings are reviewed during the String Similarity review
to determine whether they are similar to those in Section 2.2.1.2.3. An
application for a gTLD string that is identified as too similar to a Reserved
Name will not pass this review.
c) Like other applied for gTLDs not passing String Similarity Review,
there is no appeal.
* Option 3: Treat the terms set forth in Section 2.2.1.2.3 as "modified
reserved names" meaning:
a) The names are available as gTLD strings only to the International
Olympic Committee, International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, as
applicable.
b) applied-for gTLD strings are reviewed during the String Similarity
review to determine whether they are similar to those in Section 2.2.1.2.3. An
application for a gTLD string that is identified as too similar to a Reserved
Name will not pass this review.
c) Like other applied for gTLDs not passing String Similarity Review,
there is no appeal.
* Option 4a - Same as Option 2, except there would be an appeal process
for those organizations that can demonstrate legitimate rights to the "reserved
names." Appeal mechanism TBD.
* Option 4b - Same as Option 3, except there would be an appeal process
for those organizations that can demonstrate legitimate rights to the "modified
reserved names." Appeal mechanism TBD.
* Option 5a: Same as Option 3 except that the "modified reserve names"
are available as gTLD strings only to the International Olympic Committee,
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement or, to those entities
receiving a letter of non-objection from the International Olympic Committee,
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement as applicable.
* Option 5b: Same as Option 5a but also to include entities receiving a
letter of non-objection from a relevant government.
* Option 6a: Same as Option 5a, except that there would be an appeal
process for those entities that can demonstrate legitimate rights to the
"modified reserved names." Appeal mechanism TBD.
* Option 6b: Same as Option 5b, except there would be an appeal process
for those entities that can demonstrate legitimate rights to the "modified
reserved names." Appeal mechanism TBD.
Question 2. Should the protections set forth in Question 1 apply to languages
in addition to those set forth in the chart in Section 2.2.1.2.3? If yes,
which additional languages?
a) Option 1: No, just the languages set forth in the Applicant Guidebook
b) Option 2: Accept GAC Proposal stating asking for protection in
"multiple languages - all translations of the listed names in languages used on
the Internet."
c) Option 3: Extending protections to other languages, but a subset of
languages.
Question 3. Should the Protections in Questions 1 and 2 apply to subsequent
gTLD rounds?
a) Option 1: Yes, it should apply in all future rounds
b) Option 2: No, it should only apply to this current round.
c) Option 3: It should apply in this current round with no decision on
subsequent rounds. We should evaluate the results of this initial round,
document lessons learned, and then decide on recommendations on subsequent
rounds based on the results of the evaluation.
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
21575 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772 Mobile: +1.202.549.5079 Fax: +1.703.738.7965 /
jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx> /
www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>
________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|