RE: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Debbie for proposing this amendment and Zahid for your expressed 
support.  

 

Rafik and Bill - Do you support it as a friendly amendment?

 

Chuck

 

From: Zahid Jamil [mailto:zahid@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:43 PM
To: HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 
rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Glen; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: Re: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion

 

I would also support this amendment.


Sincerely,

Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
www.jamilandjamil.com


*** This Message Has Been Sent Using BlackBerry Internet Service from Mobilink 
***

________________________________

From: <HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 

Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 18:46:24 -0500

To: <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>

Cc: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>; <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: RE: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion

 

Rafik,

I definitely support the work of the JAS working group and submitted comments 
to that effect when the initial report was published.  Thanks for your efforts 
and those of the WG!

I was wondering if you would consider a friendly amendment to your Motion for 
JAS WG charter extension.  I would like to add the concept of bundling 
applications for multiple IDN scripts in small or underserved languages, at 
discounted fees. 

Rationale:  For example, a multinational organization could consider multiple 
IDN scripts (like Arabic or Korean) to connect with a community in their native 
language.  At $185,000 per application, that becomes very cost prohibitive, 
especially for a NGOs that may want to use the string to deliver services and 
not monetize the string for profits.     

In my reading of the report, it seems the WG considered bundling applications 
for multiple IDN scripts at discounted fees.  (See "Support for Build-out in 
Underserved Languages and Scripts" Item 2.2.1)

So, would you consider a friendly amendment adding the following objective to 
the list provided in the Motion?

"Design mechanisms to encourage the build out of Internationalized Domain Names 
(IDNs) in small or underserved languages."

Thanks,

Debbie

Debra Y. Hughes l Senior Counsel 
American Red Cross 

Office of the General Counsel  
2025 E Street, NW 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
Phone: (202) 303-5356 
Fax: (202) 303-0143 
HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:HughesDeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  

 

________________________________

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Rafik Dammak
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:09 AM
To: Adrian Kinderis
Cc: Council GNSO; Glen de Saint Géry; Gomes, Chuck
Subject: Re: [council] JAS WG charter extension motion

 

Hi Adrian,

 

thank you for your interest,

for clarification, an applicant won't necessary apply or/and have all kind of 
support.

 

1- it respect cost-recovery principle and we will work with the new gTLD 
program staff to accommodate that (Chuck amendment).  We will work on topic of  
external sources of donors or foundations willing to support financially 
applicants.  
2- yes, we didn't state  exceptions for applicants regarding those 
requirements, assistance or support can be technical (from  various service 
providers etc) or financial ( subsidized from external sources). the WG will 
work  to figure out how this could best be done.

3- translation of material etc but not necessarily by ICANN, again the WG will 
work to figure out how it can be done

 

as you see the WG will work to explore how things will be done (guidelines)

 
Regards

 

Rafik

 

2010/11/17 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