ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS WG call 5 May

  • To: Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS WG call 5 May
  • From: Elaine Pruis <elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 20:47:13 -0700

Thank you,

I will participate on both work teams.


On May 5, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Olof Nordling wrote:

Dear all,
Action points from today’s call:

1. FYI, Avri Doria and Evan Leibovitch were unanimously elected co-chairs for the WG – congratulations! And thanks to Rafik for chairing the launch phase!

2. All to review and agree revised version of WG charter (see draft text below, also on the wiki https://st.icann.org/so-ac-new-gtld-wg/index.cgi ) - in time for handling at GNSO Council and ALAC upcoming meetings at 20 and 25 May, respectively.

3. Work will proceed in two work teams, for reviewing application fee structure and for “Who and What” (identifying applicants in need of support). Both work teams open for all, using the JAS WG mailing list and the wiki (team headings and some documents/links have been put in the wiki https://st.icann.org/so-ac-new-gtld-wg/index.cgi)

4. Co-chairs and staff will further consider call schedule and call length, proposed agenda for upcoming calls and planning of activities at the ICANN Brussels meeting.

I think that’s it – did I forget anything?

All the best

Revised draft charter as per 5 May

Preamble: The Joint SO/AC Working Group on New gTLD Applicant Support shall evaluate and propose policy recommendations regarding specific support to new gTLD applicants in justified cases. The working group expects to identify suitable criteria for provision of such support, to identify suitable support forms and to identify potential providers of such support. However, there is no presumption that the outcome will imply any particular governing structure. Accordingly, if the recommendations indicate that the preferred solutions are of a voluntary nature, the criteria and other provisions arrived at in line with the objectives below will solely serve as advice to the parties concerned. The objectives are not listed in any priority order. An overall consideration is that the outcomes of the WG should not lead to delays of the New gTLD process.

Objective 1: To identify suitable criteria that new gTLD applicants must fulfill to qualify for dedicated support. The criteria may be different for different types of support identified in line with Objective 2 and 3 below.

Objective 2: To identify how the application fee can be reduced to accommodate applicants that fulfill appropriate criteria to qualify for this benefit.

Objective 3: To identify what kinds of support (e.g. technical assistance, organizational assistance, financial assistance, fee reduction) and support timelines (e.g. support for the application period only, continuous support) are appropriate for new gTLD applicants fulfilling identified criteria.

Objective 4: To identify potential providers of the identified kinds of support as well as appropriate mechanisms to enable support provisioning.

Objective 5: To identify conditions and mechanisms required to minimize the risk of inappropriate access to support.

Elaine Pruis
VP Client Services
+1 509 899 3161

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy