RE: [gnso-rn-wg] Fwd: [gtld-council] Copy of Letter from GNSO Council to GAC regarding the new gTLD principles

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <mxr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would also like to ask this question re Sec. 2.4, per my correspondence to 
Council list.

Furthermore, we note close similarity among many longstanding ccTLDs (such as 
.ai/.al, .am/.an, .bi/.bj, .ch/.cn, .gg/.gq, .ni/.nl, .to/.tp and others).  Is 
the GAC aware of any confusion amongst users of these ccTLDs?

Bruce has supported asking of the question, and Chuck has indicated no problem 
with doing so.  Have not heard any other comments.

Mike Rodenbaugh

Sr. Legal Director

Yahoo! Inc.

 

NOTICE:  This communication is confidential and may be protected by 
attorney-client and/or work product privilege.  If you are not the intended 
recipient, please notify me by reply, and delete this communication and any 
attachments.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-rn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Liz Williams
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 11:49 AM
To: GNSO RN WG
Subject: [gnso-rn-wg] Fwd: [gtld-council] Copy of Letter from GNSO Council to 
GAC regarding the new gTLD principles

Everyone

Here is the correspondence that has triggered the meeting on 16  
April, 14h00.  Add any further questions you would like to put into  
the mix for the meeting -- earlier rather than later is better.

Kind regards.

Liz
.....................................................

Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob




Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri 30 Mar 2007 12:22:17 GMT+02:00
> To: "GNSO Council" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [gtld-council] Copy of Letter from GNSO Council to GAC  
> regarding the new gTLD principles
>
>
>
> To: Chair, Government Advisory Committee to ICANN
>
> From: Chair, Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) of ICANN
>
> Cc:  GAC Liaison to the GNSO
>
>
> Dear Janis,
>
> Thank you very much for transmitting the 28 March 2007 GAC  
> Principles Regarding New gTLDs.
>
> The GNSO Committee on new gTLDs discussed the principles in some  
> detail on 29 March as part of our ongoing Committee work, and the  
> New gTLDs Committee would like to take advantage of the GAC advice  
> of section 3.2 that states:
>
>  "ICANN should consult the GAC, as appropriate, regarding any  
> questions pertaining to the interpretation of these principles."
>
> The New gTLDs Committee had some further questions about the  
> interpretation of some of the principles.  Here are some examples  
> of where we are seeking clarification:
>
> Section 2.2 - "ICANN should avoid country, territory or place  
> names, and country, territory or regional language or people  
> descriptions, unless in agreement with the relevant governments or  
> public authorities. "
>
> It would help to have some examples of some of these terms - e.g  
> example of "people descriptions", along with examples of relevant  
> governments or public authorities associated with each term.
>
>
>
> Section 2.4 -- in particular, "to avoid confusion with country code  
> Top Level Domains no two letter gTLDs should be introduced."
>
> It would help to have more clarity on what was meant by  
> "letter".    Does this refer to two ASCII letters such as ".aa", or  
> does it also incorporate IDN names such as  ".xn--mxaa" in the DNS  
> (which could be displayed as ".αα" via software running on a  
> user's computer)?
>
>
> 2.12  ICANN should continue to ensure that registrants and  
> registrars in new gTLDs have access to an independent appeals  
> process in relation to registry decisions related to pricing  
> changes, renewal procedures, service levels, or the unilateral and  
> significant change of contract conditions.
>
> The words above say "should continue".   Presently we are not aware  
> of an existing independent appeals process for "registry decisions"  
> for gTLDs.   It would help to have some clarity on the intent of  
> this clause.
>
>
> The New gTLD Committee believes that it would be helpful to have a  
> teleconference between the New gTLD Committee and members of the  
> GAC involved in drafting the principles to allow the Committee to  
> gain more clarity.   Please let me know if the GAC would support  
> holding such a teleconference, or whether the GAC would suggest  
> other mechanisms for seeking further interpretation of the principles.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>
>