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

[Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Olof,

I will volunteer for both WT.
about point 2, I guess that we need to have the charter approved before 13th
May for the GNSO council to vote for the corresponding motion.

Regards

Rafik

2010/5/6 Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>

>  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
>
>
>
> Olof
>
> ------------------------
>
> 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.
>
>
>