Re: [council] GNSO Council letter to the GAC

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Edmon,

Ì think that is a very useful suggestion, thank you. As the clock is
running, I am copying this to the Council list.

I am fine with you edit and will amend the draft accordingly unless anyone
objects.

Thanks,

Stéphane


Le 12/05/09 12:25, « Edmon Chung » <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> sorry for the late response... I do see that the 48 hr clock started clicking
> so did not want to send this to the council list unless you feel comfortable
> about it...
>  
> you had: " No such restrictions are imposed on existing gTLD registries and we
> feel it would be
> inappropriate to attempt to use the new gTLD program to introduce new
> contractual
> obligations previously not requested or deemed necessary."
>  
> I don't think that is entirely true... in our contract and in all the ones in
> the s round, there is a clause:
> " All geographic and geopolitical names contained in the ISO 3166-1 list from
> time to time shall initially be reserved at both the second level and at all
> other levels within the TLD at which the Registry Operator provides for
> registrations. All names shall be reserved both in English and in all related
> official languages as may be directed by ICANN or the GAC."
>  
> What this effectively means is that registries have had to use the other ISO
> lists previously already to produce the  "reserved both in English and in all
> related official languages" part.
>  
> Then of course there is the other part in the agreement that says:
> "In addition, Registry Operator shall reserve names of territories, distinct
> geographic locations, and other geographic and geopolitical names as ICANN may
> direct from time to time."
>  
> Would like to suggest edits as follows:
>  
> Restrictions are already imposed on existing gTLD registries in this regard,
> especially with regards to those adopted for the sTLD round of gTLDs.  We feel
> that current contractual obligations are already appropriate and new
> contractual obligations maybe unnecessary.
>  
>  
> Edmon
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:12 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] GNSO Council letter to the GAC
>  
> Dear all,
> 
> In a letter dated April 24 2009, GAC Chair Janis Karklins wrote to ICANN CEO
> Paul Twomey on the subject of geographical names and the new gTLD process.
> 
> At our Council meeting last week, it was decided that we should respond to
> this letter and I volunteered to write a draft. We agreed that our response
> should be sent to the GAC asap, preferably by the end of this week, and Avri
> informed the GAC that they should expect a response from the GNSO Council by
> this Friday.
> 
> In order to fine-tune our draft response, a team was set up and I submitted my
> draft to the team yesterday.
> 
> The team responded very quickly in order to meet the Council¹s Friday deadline
> and considered my draft ³good to go², with one addition by David Maher and a
> comment by Avri, both of which have been included in the draft letter we are
> submitting to the full Council today (see attached).
> 
> Could you please review and let me know of any further changes you would like
> to make, or of your approval, so that Avri may then send the finished letter
> to the GAC on Friday.
> 
> My thanks to the members of the drafting team: David Maher - Avri Doria -
> Nacho Amadoz - Edmon Chung - Brian Cute - Ken Stubbs - Olga Cavalli  - Tony
> Harris - Terry Davis ­ William Drake.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Stéphane Van Gelder
>