RE: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks a lot Philip.  You are absolutely correct that my concerns were
with regard to wording; I have always supported the group's objectives.
And I think your wording changes are very constructive.  I an curious
about what others on the committee think.  I will myself focus in a
little more detail later in the day when I have more time.
 
Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
 


________________________________

        From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
        Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:44 AM
        To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [gtld-council] Recommendation 20 
        
        
        Chuck,
        I believe I agree with all of your points.
        What you seem to be saying is that you are concerned that the
current wording of rec.20 is UNCLEAR.
        But I do not see you really opposing the group's objectives I
set out in the annotated version of current rec.20
        Is that correct ?
         
        If so our task is easy: write a clearer text. (We don't need to
do this is one gangling sentence as we are writing a recommendation not
law !)
        How about this:
         
        rec20 - revised
        "An application will be rejected if it is determined that there
is substantial opposition to it from a significant established
institution representing a sector or community for which the string may
either be explicitly or implicitly targeted.
         
        Opposition must be objection based: application staff will
monitor public comments and where appropriate explain the objection
procedure to an objector with standing.
         
        The sector or community should be interpreted broadly and will
include for example an economic sector, a cultural community, or a
linguistic community.
         
        Explicit targeting means there is a description of the intended
use of the TLD in the application.
        Implicit targeting means that the objecting institution makes an
assumption of targeting or that there may be confusion by users over its
intended use".
        -------------------------------------------
        To which we add these (revised) staff notes:
        
        Substantial Opposition: A procedure including required
documentation will be prepared by ICANN. This documentation will include
elements such as a detailed description of the sector or community
affected and the nature of the harm it would cause that sector or
community to have the TLD granted to the applicant. 
         
        
        Established institution: While the normal criteria should be for
an institution that has been in formal existence for at least 10 years,
in exceptional cases, standing may be granted to an institution that has
been in existence for fewer then 10 years. Exceptional circumstance may
relate to reasons such as: organization was reorganized or merged with
another organization, community is younger the 10 years.
        
        
        Formal existence: This is defined by an appropriate form of
public registration or clear public historical evidence. Third party
validation by a government, Intergovernmental organization or well known
established institution (e.g. International Red Cross, a Bar
Association, a Medical Certification Body) may also be used.
        ----------------------------------------------
        None of the new wording changes the main group's objectives but
I hope may capture the potential ambiguities. Does it ?
         
        Philip