Re: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATION

["Anthony Harris" <harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Re: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATIONI fully agree with Stephane, 
having read all the
comments I disagree that comments to the
contrary are overwhelming, there are simply
repeated expressions from brand interests
complaining about the introduction of new 
TLDs. I thought we were past that discussion
after three years of Council work on this
new round?

Tony Harris
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stéphane Van Gelder 
  To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ; 'Council GNSO' 
  Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [council] MOTION 1 ON gTLD IMPLEMENTATION


  Mike,

  May I suggest that the GNSO's position should be to request for the planned 
implementation agenda to be kept on track, which is exactly what that sentence 
says?

  There are also a lot of comments from the community strongly requesting that 
no further time be lost or, indeed, that the process be sped up.

  As the new TLD program stems from the GNSO, it would not seem out of place 
for the GNSO to strive towards a timely implementation of this program.

  Thanks,

  Stéphane Van Gelder


  Le 08/01/09 18:39, « Mike Rodenbaugh » <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :


    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#_Toc43798015
 ) 
    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.