[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Proposal for application fee reduction

[Cintra Sooknanan <cintra.sooknanan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear All,

Following Peter Dengate Thrush's statement at the GAC/Board meeting in March
that a fee reduction will be considered for needy applicants. I propose that
we suggest a fee removal/reduction to apply to the legal part of
the application cost. The legal part will instead be covered by the needy
applicant by -

a) Passing our criteria for needy applicants;
b) Taking out and maintaining Indemnity Insurance to some minimum coverage
amount e.g. US$5million; and
c) Contributing annually to the body evaluating the criteria for need
(suggest ICANN Non profit company created for this purpose) a specific
amount to ICANN'S gTLD Compensation Fund. This fund is to be managed for the
payment of losses in excess of that covered by insurance or for other
purposes and is to be disbursed and managed solely by the body evaluating
the needy criteria. See
http://www.sra.org.uk/sra/regulatory-framework/solicitors-compensation-fund-rules-2009.page


The aim of indemnity insurance is to allow aggrieved parties to directly
claim against the gTLD owner through their insurance provider.See
http://www.insuranceprofessionalindemnity.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_indemnity_insurance
http://ezinearticles.com/?How-Professional-Indemnity-Liability-Insurance-Works&id=2658423
http://www.bytestart.co.uk/content/20/20_3/hiscox-professional-indemnity-insurance.shtml
http://www.sra.org.uk/siir/
Interestingly, we may also cater for matters dealt with by the Ombudsman
e.g. as set out in the link above
1*.8*

*Award by regulatory authority*

*The Insurer will indemnify each Insured against any amount paid or payable
in accordance with the recommendation or determination of the Legal Services
Ombudsman, the Legal Complaints Service, the Office for Legal Complaints
(including the Legal Ombudsman pursuant to sections 137(2)(c) and section
137(4)(b) of the Legal Services Act 2007) or any other regulatory authority
to the same extent as it indemnifies the Insured against civil liability
provided that the Insurer will have no Liability in respect of any
determination by the Legal Ombudsman pursuant to section 137(2)(b) of the
Legal Services Act 2007 to refund any fees paid to the Insured.*
This also has the benefit of taking ICANN out of the equation as the party
being sued and in fact may allow ICANN to join the aggrieved party in its
claim if it is found that the gTLD holder also caused some damage to ICANN's
reputation etc.

This is just a framework I am suggesting, we will have to modify it to the
gTLD process. But I think it is applicable and a good way to reduce fees and
build some assurance that ICANN will not have to constantly be on guard for
litigation.

I look forward to your comments.

Regards

Cintra Sooknanan