RES: [ispcp] SUPPORT FOR NON-PROFIT NEW gTLD APPLICANTS

["Jaime Plug In" <jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Tony,

 

I must confess I don?t have a formed opinion on that matter.

 

Jaime Wagner
 <mailto:jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> jaime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cel (51) 8126-0916
Fax (51) 3123-1708

 

De: owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ispcp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome
de Anthony Harris
Enviada em: terça-feira, 11 de maio de 2010 13:56
Para: ispcp@xxxxxxxxx
Assunto: [ispcp] SUPPORT FOR NON-PROFIT NEW gTLD APPLICANTS

 

Guys,

 

I am participating in the WG that has been tasked to

evaluate ways to support non-profit and under-resourced

applicants for new gTLDs.

 

I am doing so as a prospective applicant, and my opinions

are voiced as personal, and not tied to the constituency.

In the attachment, you can see comments submitted to

ICANN some time ago, on behalf of the Federation I

represent, and which address the justifications for the

somewhat high fee structure defined for the next round

of gTLD applications. Previous rounds featured an

application fee of 45 or 50K and the next round will

cost 185K.

 

The charter for this WG will be sent to the Council for

discussion on May 20th. 

 

As a constituency, we have always been supportive of a

measured and controllable process for the introduction

of new gTLDs, and a robust application fee is of course

a deterrent to unscrupulous prospectors. 

 

The current debate in the working group

revolves around two objectives:

 

- Determine if the proposed 185K imposes an excessive

  and unjustifiable burden on non-profit applicants, seeking

  strings that will be simple and non-conflicting.

- Determine ways (if any) whereby additional assistance to

  these applicants can be resourced, such as potential

  donor organizations, foundations, etc.

 

I thought I would submit this background for Wolf-Ulrich

and Jaime to be aware of what's going on, prior to

the Council deliberations.

 

Tony Harris