Re: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
- To: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gtld-council] PDP Dec 05: Follow-up to 23 June
- From: Liz Williams <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:47:54 +0200
Thanks for that -- do I understand you correctly that you don't have
an issue with the drafting of the recommendation but that in
implementation there would be limitations on who could object to what?
If you still have a problem with the drafting of the recommendation,
do you have an alternative suggestion?
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob
On 24 Jun 2007, at 20:23, Robin Gross wrote:
As I stated yesterday in the meeting, there must be a limitation on
the *type* of objection that can stop an application for a new gtld
(in addition to *who* can complain).
An objection to the string must be based on either law or technical/
operational issues. Otherwise, we swallow up all our attempts to
narrow evaluation criteria to these issues and it becomes a free
The language for #20 below still permits the 'Legion of Decency'
type of actors or competitors to stop an application for non-legal
reasons. It encourages lobbying for and against applications -
really bad idea.
How about this for clarity:
"An application will be rejected if it is determined that
there is opposition to it from among established
institutions of the economic sector, or cultural community, and
of that opposition is substantial.
Clarifies our intent
Deletes redundant "language community" as it is subset of cultural