RE: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Rafik,

I have been reviewing the work of the JAS WG.

It is all good work that is deserved of our attention.

However, I have read the various Board resolutions that were the genesis of the 
working. The original notion was developed in order to provide support to 
applicants.

Is it fair to say that, in your mind (or the WG’s for that matter), the 
following will be true given the support regime as you would have it;

- a new gTLD applicant will have to pay the application fee in its entirety but 
will be subsidized through a foundation or external parties?
- a new gTLD applicant will have to establish a Registry System to full and 
‘standard’ ICANN compliance but may be subsidized in order to cover the costs 
associated?
- ICANN may provide assistance in preparing the application for those where 
English is not a first language

Can you clarify this for me so I can take this back to my SG? Thanks.


Adrian Kinderis


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:01 AM
To: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion


Hello,

I want to submit this motion for JAS WG charter extension in response to ICANN 
board resolution about supporting applicants and for completion a list of 
further work items.

Regards

Rafik