Re: [council] new gTLD Program Committee resolution regarding Specification 13 of the new gTLD registry agreement

[Maria Farrell <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jonathan,

Many thanks for this. It's a topic I've not personally taken a strong view
on and will definitely need a little time to inform myself and consult with
my constituency about. I appreciate this being on this week's agenda for
information and discussion so we can start considering the implications as
well as the possibilities / advisability of action.

In principle - and without having anything yet to add to the substantive
discussion - I agree with others that if the Board is asking us for our
view, then we should take and be seen to take that request seriously.

All the best, Maria


On 4 April 2014 16:23, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> I have continued to give this some thought and follow-up.  You will see
> that an initial discussion is now scheduled for our council meeting next
> week.
>
>
>
> This is part of a timetable we need to be aware of which seems to me to be
> as follows:
>
>
>
> 1.       28 March 2014 - Publication date of minutes of NGPC
>
> a.       Refers the issue to the GNSO Council and
>
> b.      Sets clock to start regarding 45 days
>
> 2.       10 April 2014 - GNSO Council Meeting
>
> a.       Become as well-briefed as possible and
>
> b.      Ask initial questions / have the discussion to clarify the
> position
>
> 3.       10 April to 8 May 2014 - Inter-meeting period
>
> a.       Provides for any supplementary information gathering and
>
> b.      Discussion / further discussion in groups / constituencies and
>
> c.       Discussion on council list and (to work within the 45 days)
>
> d.      Drafting of a response
>
> 4.       28 April 2014 - Motion deadline for next GNSO meeting
>
> 5.       8 May 2014 - GNSO Meeting
>
> a.       Opportunity to conclude a position in time to meet 45 day
> deadline or
>
> b.      Agree to request an extension
>
> 6.       12 May 2014 - 45 day deadline
>
>
>
> Recognising that by our 10 April meeting, you may not yet have had time to
> become fully informed or consult within your groups, I suggest we focus
> that discussion on establishing the background and facts.
>
> The objective being to ensure that we are collectively and individually as
> fully and uniformly informed as possible as we move forward to consult
> within our respective groups.  Following that, we can then go on to decide
> on the appropriate response to the NGPC
>
>
>
> I have spoken today to Martin Sutton, Chair of the Brand Registry Group
> and Martin is willing to brief us at the meeting on 10th of April or, at
> least, to be available to answer any questions regarding Specification 13.
>
>
>
> In addition, is there any other information that could be helpful in
> ensuring that Councillors are as well-informed as possible to move forward
> with this issue?
>
>
>
> I am mindful of Thomas's point below where it is desirable for us to act
> effectively and in a timely fashion.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Rickert [mailto:rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 01 April 2014 18:33
> To: <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Volker Greimann; Bruce Tonkin; <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [council] new gTLD Program Committee resolution regarding
> Specification 13 of the new gTLD registry agreement
>
>
>
> All,
>
> as a Council, we need to be responsive when we are asked and we should get
> back to the Board with a substantive answer in time. We cannot complain
> about being circumvented and not answer when we are asked.
>
>
>
> In terms of how we do this: This might be a matter of implementation
> oversight, so can we reach out to original WG members and tap their
> knowledge about the WG deliberations at the time on this specific
> recommendation?
>
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
> =============
>
> thomas-rickert.tel
>
> +49.228.74.898.0
>
>
>
> > Am 01.04.2014 um 18:36 schrieb "Jonathan Robinson" <
> jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Volker,
>
> >
>
> > Good point to place this discussion in the context of the promotion of "
> ...
>
> > competition, consumer choice and consumer trust ... " as a reference
> point.
>
> >
>
> > Also, to be aware that many (all?) of us may need time to sound out
>
> > our respective groups / constituencies on the substance and processes
>
> > relating to this issue.
>
> >
>
> > Jonathan
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: Volker Greimann 
> > [mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ]
>
> > Sent: 01 April 2014 12:57
>
> > To: jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Bruce Tonkin'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Subject: Re: [council] new gTLD Program Committee resolution regarding
>
> > Specification 13 of the new gTLD registry agreement
>
> >
>
> > Hi Jonathan,
>
> >
>
> > I would argue in favor of providing some form of advice as the matter
>
> > clearly touches upon some of the most basic policies, namely promoting
>
> > competition through equal, non-discriminatory registrar access across
>
> > all gTLDs. At face value the excemption seems to be in direct conflict
>
> > with Recommendation 19.
>
> >
>
> > While this conflict may be resolvable, remaining mute on the matter
>
> > may be detrimental when the board has explicitly reached out to the
>
> > GNSO for input on the matter. While we have - as a council - remained
>
> > mute during the public comment phase, we should work on a common
>
> > position now, if achievable.
>
> >
>
> > Best,
>
> >
>
> > Volker
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Am 01.04.2014 09:40, schrieb Jonathan Robinson:
>
> >> All,
>
> >>
>
> >> As per the resolution below, we need to be aware of the following point:
>
> >>
>
> >> ---
>
> >>
>
> >> Implementation will not take effect until 45 days from the
>
> >> publication of this resolution to:
>
> >>
>
> >>  (i) provide the GNSO Council an opportunity to advise ICANN as to
>
> >> whether the GNSO Council believes that this additional provision is
>
> >> inconsistent with the letter and intent of GNSO Policy Recommendation
>
> >> 19 on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains;
>
> >>
>
> >> or (ii) advise ICANN that the GNSO Council needs additional time for
>
> >> review, including an explanation as to why additional time is required.
>
> >>
>
> >> ---
>
> >>
>
> >> I understand the 45 days from publication (28 March 2014) to be
>
> >> [23h59 UTC] on 12 May 2014.
>
> >>
>
> >> Therefore the course of action open to the Council seems to me that
>
> >> we must exercise one of the following (1, 2a, 2b, 2c) options on or
>
> >> before 10 May
>
> >> 2014:
>
> >>
>
> >> 1. To provide no advice and therefore:
>
> >> To NOT advise ICANN that the GNSO Council believes that this
>
> >> additional provision is inconsistent [with the letter and intent of
>
> >> GNSO Policy Recommendation 19] in which case the additional provision
>
> >> will
>
> > prevail.
>
> >>
>
> >> 2. To provide advice and therefore:
>
> >> (a) To advise ICANN that the GNSO Council believes that this
>
> >> additional provision is NOT inconsistent [with the letter and intent
>
> >> of GNSO Policy Recommendation 19] in which case the additional
>
> >> provision
>
> > will prevail.
>
> >> OR
>
> >> (b) To advise ICANN that the GNSO Council believes that this
>
> >> additional provision is inconsistent [with the letter and intent of
>
> >> GNSO Policy Recommendation 19] in which case the additional provision
>
> >> may
>
> > NOT prevail.
>
> >> OR
>
> >> (c) To advise that the GNSO Council needs additional time for review,
>
> >> including an explanation as to why additional time is required.
>
> >>
>
> >> N.B. 2(a) is logically equivalent to 1 above except that in the case
>
> >> of 2(a), we pro-actively provide the advice.
>
> >>
>
> >> In looking into this in a little more detail, I can see:
>
> >>
>
> >> Recommendation 19 is that "Registries must use only ICANN accredited
>
> >> registrars in registering domain names and may not discriminate among
>
> >> such accredited registrars."
>
> >> See here:
>
> >> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/council-report-to-board-pdp-ne
>
> >> w
>
> >> -gtlds
>
> >> -11sep07.pdf
>
> >>
>
> >> The original public comment period on Specification 13 is located here:
>
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/spec13-06dec13-en.htm
>
> >>
>
> >> including the BRG's supporting statement here:
>
> >> http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/brand-spec-13-statement-0
>
> >> 6
>
> >> dec13-
>
> >> en.pdf
>
> >>
>
> >> and the ICANN staff summary here:
>
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/report-comments-spec13-14
>
> >> m
>
> >> ar14-e
>
> >> n.pdf
>
> >>
>
> >> Note that the GNSO Council did not previously comment or provide
>
> >> advice to ICANN in relation to this matter i.e. the " Proposal for a
>
> >> Specification 13 to the ICANN Registry Agreement to Contractually
>
> >> Reflect Certain Limited Aspects of ".Brand" New gTLDs".
>
> >>
>
> >> Thanks,
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Jonathan
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
>
> >> From: Bruce Tonkin 
> >> [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ]
>
> >> Sent: 31 March 2014 08:02
>
> >> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >> Subject: [council] new gTLD Program Committee resolution regarding
>
> >> Specification 13 of the new gTLD registry agreement
>
> >>
>
> >> From:
>
> >> http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-2
>
> >> 6
>
> >> mar14-
>
> >> en.htm
>
> >>
>
> >> Approval of Registry Agreement Specification 13 for Brand Category of
>
> >> Applicants
>
> >>
>
> >>  Whereas, on 2 July 2013, the ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee
>
> >> (NGPC) approved the form of the New gTLD Registry Agreement to be
>
> >> entered into by ICANN and successful New gTLD applicants.
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, the Brand Registry Group engaged with ICANN regarding
>
> >> modifications to the New gTLD Registry Agreement to address concerns
>
> >> of their constituents.
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, on 6 December 2013, ICANN posted for public comment a
>
> >> proposed Specification 13 to the New gTLD Registry Agreement
>
> > http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/base-agreement-spec-13-pro
>
> > posed-
>
> >> 06dec13-en.pdf   [PDF, 80 KB] ("Specification 13"), which if adopted
> would
>
> >> provide limited accommodations to registry operators of TLDs that
>
> >> qualify as ".Brand TLDs."
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, the proposed Specification 13 was revised in response to the
>
> >> public comments, including the removal of a provision allowing a
>
> >> registry operator of a .BRAND TLD to designate one or more ICANN
>
> >> accredited registrars as the exclusive registrar(s) for the TLD in
>
> > response to a comment submitted by a
>
> >> group of eleven registrars.   An update to the community and a revised
>
> > draft
>
> >> was posted on the ICANN Blog on 14 March 2014
>
> >> (http://blog.icann.org/2014/03/summary-and-analysis-of-specification-
>
> >> 1
>
> >> 3-publ
>
> >> ic-comments/ ).
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, on 25 March 2014 the NGPC received notification from the
>
> >> group of registrars that submitted the joint comment referenced above
>
> >> during the public comment period that it no longer objected to the
>
> >> inclusion of a provision allowing a registry operator of a .BRAND TLD
>
> >> to be limited to using no more than two registrars at one time.
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, the NGPC takes specific note of Policy Recommendation 19 in
>
> >> the GNSO's Final Report on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level
>
> >> Domains (8 August 2007), which provides that "registries must use
>
> >> only ICANN accredited registrars in registering domain names and may
>
> >> not discriminate among such accredited registrars."
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, the NGPC has considered all of the comments received from
>
> >> the community, and has determined that the revised Specification 13
>
> >> provides appropriate and limited accommodations to registry operators
>
> >> of TLDs that qualify as .Brand TLDs.
>
> >>
>
> >> Whereas, the NGPC is undertaking this action pursuant to the
>
> >> authority granted to it by the Board on 10 April 2012, to exercise
>
> >> the ICANN Board's authority for any and all issues that may arise
>
> >> relating to the New gTLD Program.
>
> >>
>
> >> Resolved (2014.03.26.NG01), the NGPC approves Specification 13 to the
>
> >> New gTLD Registry Agreement attached to this Resolution as Annex 1
>
> > (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-new-gtld-a
>
> > nnex-1
>
> >> -26mar14-en.pdf   ) [PDF, 106 KB] (which does not include the clause
>
> >> allowing a .Brand registry operator to designate a limited number
>
> >> preferred registrars for the TLD), and authorizes the President and
>
> >> CEO, or his designee, to take all necessary steps to implement
>
> >> Specification 13 to the New gTLD Registry Agreement consistent with
>
> >> this
>
> > resolution.
>
> >>
>
> >> Resolved (2014.03.26.NG02), the NGPC approves the incorporation of
>
> >> the additional clause identified below into Specification 13.
>
> >> Implementation will not take effect until 45 days from the
>
> >> publication of this resolution
>
> >> to:
>
> >>
>
> >>  (i) provide the GNSO Council an opportunity to advise ICANN as to
>
> >> whether the GNSO Council believes that this additional provision is
>
> >> inconsistent with the letter and intent of GNSO Policy Recommendation
>
> >> 19 on the Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains;
>
> >>
>
> >> or (ii) advise ICANN that the GNSO Council needs additional time for
>
> >> review, including an explanation as to why additional time is required.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>    "The second sentence of Section 2.9(a) of the Agreement is
>
> > superseded
>
> >> by the following:
>
> >>
>
> >>    Subject to the requirements of Specification 11, Registry Operator
>
> >> must either (i) provide non-discriminatory access to    Registry
> Services to
>
> >> all ICANN accredited registrars that enter into and are in compliance
> with
>
> >> the registry-registrar    agreement for the TLD; provided that
>
> > Registry
>
> >> Operator may establish non-discriminatory criteria for qualification to
>
> >> register    names in the TLD that are reasonably related to the proper
>
> >> functioning of the TLD, or (ii) designate no more than three    ICANN
>
> >> accredited registrars at any point in time to serve as the exclusive
>
> >> registrar(s) for the TLD."
>
> >>
>
> >> A .BRAND TLD registry operator may amend its Specification 13 to
>
> >> incorporate this provision upon request as part of implementation.
>
> >> The President and CEO, or his designee, is authorized to take all
>
> >> necessary steps to implement this provision in Specification 13 to
>
> >> the New gTLD Registry Agreement consistent with this resolution.
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>
> >
>
> > Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> >
>
> > Volker A. Greimann
>
> > - Rechtsabteilung -
>
> >
>
> > Key-Systems GmbH
>
> > Im Oberen Werk 1
>
> > 66386 St. Ingbert
>
> > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>
> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>
> > Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >
>
> > Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com /
>
> > www.BrandShelter.com
>
> >
>
> > Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
>
> > www.facebook.com/KeySystems
>
> > www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> >
>
> > Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
>
> > Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.:
>
> > DE211006534
>
> >
>
> > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>
> > www.keydrive.lu
>
> >
>
> > Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den
>
> > angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe,
>
> > Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist
>
> > unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so
>
> > bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung
> zu setzen.
>
> >
>
> > --------------------------------------------
>
> >
>
> > Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
> us.
>
> >
>
> > Best regards,
>
> >
>
> > Volker A. Greimann
>
> > - legal department -
>
> >
>
> > Key-Systems GmbH
>
> > Im Oberen Werk 1
>
> > 66386 St. Ingbert
>
> > Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
>
> > Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
>
> > Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >
>
> > Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com /
>
> > www.BrandShelter.com
>
> >
>
> > Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay
> updated:
>
> > www.facebook.com/KeySystems
>
> > www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> >
>
> > CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>
> > Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> >
>
> > Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>
> > www.keydrive.lu
>
> >
>
> > This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to
>
> > whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any
>
> > content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely
>
> > on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected
>
> > this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or
> contacting us by telephone.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>