ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATION

  • To: "'Council GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATION
  • From: "Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:39:06 -0800
  • In-reply-to:
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Organization: Rodenbaugh Law
  • References: <2038A8CF8DBA4593A5A0A7571E7CC24C@harrys>
  • Reply-to: <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: Aclxk4rTsOvIxbEfTEa+6hfBMccBwwAHgx/wAAGPPeA=

Chuck,

 

Would you consider it a friendly amendment to remove this language, given
the overwhelming public comment to the contrary?

 

Considerable delays have been incurred in the implementation of new gTLDs
and the GNSO wishes to minimize any further delays.

 

The BC probably cannot support this motion anyway, but if it passes it would
be more palatable to the community without this potentially inflammatory
language.

 

Thanks,

Mike

 

  _____  

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Anthony Harris
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:15 AM
To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATION

 

I would like to second this motion as presented

by Chuck Gomes.

 

Tony Harris

 

 


Motions on gTLD Implementation


Motion 1 (tabled until 8 January meeting)


Made by Chuck Gomes

Seconded by:

Whereas:

Implementation Guideline E states, "The application submission date will be
at least four months after the issue of the Request for Proposal and ICANN
will promote the opening of the application round." (See Final Report, Part
A, Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains, dated 8 August 2007 at
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm#_Toc43
798015 ) 
The intent of the GNSO with regard to Guideline E was to attempt to ensure
that all potential applicants, including those that have not been active in
recent ICANN activities regarding the introduction of new gTLDs, would be
informed of the process and have reasonable time to prepare a proposal if
they so desire. 
The minimum 4-month period for promoting the opening of the application
round is commonly referred to as the 'Communications Period'. 
Considerable delays have been incurred in the implementation of new gTLDs
and the GNSO wishes to minimize any further delays. 
It appears evident that a second Draft Applicant Guidebook (RFP) will be
posted at some time after the end of the two 45-day public comment periods
related to the initial version of the Guidebook (in English and other
languages). 
Resolve:

The GNSO Council changes Implementation Guideline E to the following: * Best
efforts will be made to ensure that the second Draft Applicant Guidebook is
posted for public comment at least 14 days before the first international
meeting of 2009, to be held in Mexico from March 1 to March 6. * ICANN will
initiate the Communications Period at the same time that the second Draft
Applicant Guidebook is posted for public comment. * The opening of the
initial application round will occur no earlier than four (4) months after
the start of the Communications Period and no earlier than 30 days after the
posting of the final Applicant Guidebook (RFP). * As applicable, promotions
for the opening of the initial application round will include: *
Announcement about the public comment period following the posting of the
second Draft Applicant Guidebook (RFP) * Information about the steps that
will follow the comment period including approval and posting of the final
Applicant

Guidebook (RFP) * Estimates of when the initial application round will
begin. 



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>