The next meeting for the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Sub Team – Track 5 – Geographic Names at the Top Level will take place on Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 20:00 UTC for 90 minutes. 

13:00 PDT, 16:00 EDT, 22:00 Paris CEST, (Thursday) 01:00 Karachi PKT, (Thursday) 05:00 Tokyo JST, (Thursday) 06:00 Melbourne AEST

For other times:


1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates

2. Status of Draft Recommendations on 2-Letter ASCII Strings and Country and Territory Names

3. Non-AGB Terms

4. AOB

Background Documents


Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - 20 August 2018.pdf



Adobe Connect recording

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar


Attendance and AC chat

Apologies: Katrin Ohlmer, Marita Moll, Heather Forrest, Javier Rua, Luca Barbero, Justine Chew


Notes/ Action Items

Action Items: 

ACTION ITEM 1: Re: Non-AGB Terms: Work Track 5 members should continue to send concrete proposals to the list.


1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates: No SOI Updates.

2. Status of Draft Recommendations on 2-Letter ASCII Strings and Country and Territory Names

Slide 5: Revising Process

Slide 6: Update on Recommendations


-- Remember that this is a GNSO PDP. 

-- WT5 should develop a process for delegating country and territory names to governments or with government permission [as related to text that was taken out of the recommendations].

3. Non-AGB Terms

Slide 8: Non-AGB Terms

Slide 9: Non-AGM Terms -- Types of Strings

Slide 10: Proposals (1/2)

Slide 11: Proposals (2/2)


-- Should be examples from both sides.

-- Is there a problem at all, and if so, what is the problem?   Is it overreach or entitlement?

-- Define once and for all that there are terms that even if they have geographic significance are not going to be given special protection.

-- Agree that these geographic indications should be treated separately from other geographical terms.

-- Don't think we have decided that any terms other than those in the AGB deserve any protection, and then we need to decide what kind of protection.

-- There have been issues that have been identified -- are these problems for which we would need a solution?

-- Not sure we are at the point that we can agree on whether there are problems and/or a need for protections.

-- What is the opinion of possible conflicts that may arise?

-- Should there be any basis for a legal right for a claim or challenge, but although the AGB was not perfect, it did provide protections.

-- Acknowledge that we have had some issues with some terms with geographic significance in the 2012 round.  Whatever the legal reasons behind those conflicts that is the starting point to aknowledge them.  Some are still lingering.  We need to learn from our experience and avoid those conflicts.

-- Look at those cases and try to learn from them.

-- Examples include Patagonia, Amazon, and some mountains in Switzerland.  We could have more issues that could come up in the future.

-- Have a framework that gives some coverage to these non-AGB geographic terms, allowing consultation with an advisory panel, being able to have an early contact, having the security that if there is a conflict there is a safe and cost-effective resolution procedure.

-- The further down the line in geo names the more difficult it is to determine protections.

-- It seems that the proposals all suggest that the government has a veto and you have to get them on your side.  It doesn't seem that both sides of the argument are being presented.

-- Where there is more than one possible meaning for a string the geographic meaning is not by default the one that deserves to be protected.

-- RE: Slide 8: The AGB did not present these strings.  The problem is subjective.  Some might feel that the protections in the AGB are inadequate, and some might feel they go too far.  The problem is hard to define because it is based on your perspective.

Slide 12: Geographical Indications


-- These very massively from country-to-country.

-- Protection under local law varies widely.

-- This is a well-known and well-documented issue.  We should get more facts.

4. AOB: None.

  • No labels