[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] charter language

[Elaine Pruis <elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

Apologies for missing the call this morning.

I do have a comment on the charter, specifically Objective 2: To  
identify how the application fee can be reduced to accommodate  
applicants that fulfill appropriate criteria to qualify for this  
benefit.
The term "reduced" indicates that the applicant would not have to pay  
their fair share of the cost of the program.

>> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/cost-considerations-23oct08-en.pdf
strongly rejects the concept of "reduced fees" for this round
"... financial requirements and fees might discourage applications  
from developing nations, or
indigenous and minority peoples, who may have different sets of  
financial opportunities
or capabilities relative to more highly developed regions of the  
world. The ICANN Organization takes
 these concerns seriously, and can in the future explore  
possibilities for future means of financial assistance
for or fee reductions to qualified applicants for new gTLDs in a  
consistent, fair, verifiable, and transparent manner.
However, this goal must be balanced with the principle of conservatism  
that first-round fees must fully fund the first-round application  
costs. "
and
"No practical method of ICANN financial assistance or fee reductions  
was identified for
the first round of new gTLD applications, though an appropriate  
mechanism might be
defined for subsequent rounds. If staff is able to identify sources  
for potential grants,
financial assistance or match-making opportunities for applicants from  
qualified
developing nations, and indigenous and minority peoples in need, the  
results will be
made publicly available. "


I'm concerned that since the board has mandated the fee as "cost  
recovery", stating "how the application fee can be reduced" could  
prevent adoption of the charter.  What about the term "how the  
application fee could be subsidized"?  "Subsidized" recognizes that  
the program is cost recovery.  The fee is "reduced" for the applicant,  
but the money paid to ICANN is the same.
Elaine



On May 10, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Olof Nordling wrote:

> Dear all,
> Action points from today’s call:
>
> 1.       Any remaining statements of interest should be sent to Glen.
>
> 2.       The revised version of WG charter is attached as agreed  
> during the call. There are just two edits compared to the previously  
> sent version (“policy” deleted in the preamble and change to  
> “snapshot” for the 15 June deliverable in the timeline). Any  
> comments regarding the charter should be sent to the list within 24  
> hours, i.e. before 15H00 UTC Tuesday 11 May.
> 3.       It was concluded that the two work teams (WT1 – review of  
> application fee structure, and WT2 – “Who and What”) need multiple  
> coordinators/leaders to animate the substance discussions and give  
> short updates at WG calls.  For WT1 – Tony Harris (assumed) and  
> Rafik Dammak (volunteer).  For WT2 – Andrew Mack and Carlos Aguirre  
> (volunteers).   Further volunteers are sought for those roles.
> 4.       Work teams could usefully consider priorities regarding  
> what should be achieved in the short, medium and long term.
> 5.       Team headings and some documents/links have been put in the  
> wiki https://st.icann.org/so-ac-new-gtld-wg/index.cgi . A list of  
> those who have already signed up to the WTs is found below and will  
> be introduced in the Wiki. WT1 – Tony Harris, Rafik Dammak, Tijani  
> Ben Jemaa, Richard Tindal, Elain Pruis, Andrew Mack. WT2 – Andrew  
> Mack, Carlos Aguirre, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Elaine Pruis, Rafik Dammak.  
> (Hope I got that right – please yell if not;-)
> 6.       The call time was seen as doable and will be kept, thus do  
> count on weekly 60-minute calls on Mondays starting at 13H00 UTC.
> All the best
>
> Olof
> <JAS WG draft charter v3.doc>
Elaine Pruis
VP Client Services
elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+1 509 899 3161

Elaine Pruis
VP Client Services
elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+1 509 899 3161