AGAT Teleconference
Meeting Number: AGAT/0211/1
Date: Wednesday, 23 February 2011
Time: 12:00 - 13:00 UTC . (For the time in various timezones click here)
Adobe Connect Chatroom: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/agat2011/
How can I participate in this meeting?
Who is on the dial out list for this meeting
Participants: Eric Brunner-Williams, Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Evan Leibovitch, Jean-Jacques Subrenat, Kathy Kleiman
Apologies: Cintra Sooknanan, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Avri Doria
Staff: Matthias Langenegger
Summary Minutes: AGAT 23.02.11 Summary Minutes
Action Items: AGAT 23.02.11 Action Items
Chat: AGAT 23.02.11 Chat
Recording: English
Transcript: AGAT 23.02.11 Transcript
Agenda: 23 February 2011
1. Roll call – 2 min
2. Introduction of the aims and objectives of the WG and Review of Areas of Focus- (10 mins) - Evan
For Reference: AGAT WG Workspace
Applicant Guidebook areas of focus for AGAT WG:
- Overhaul, requirement of 100% transparency or total elimination of the Independent Objector
- Replacement of the Dispute Resolution Service Provider with an expert panel, and replacement of a costly adversarial adjudicated system with one more objective and streamlined
- Explicit Board affirmation of applications which are recommended (by the above experts) to be rejected because of obscenity
- Use of ALAC and GAC, possibly as a replacement for the Independent Objector, as a filter for obscenity-based objections
- Reducing trademark "bullying" through modification of the time and language requirements of the URS mechanism
- Possible explicit categorisation of applications, to denote those which meet a criteria of community and financial need, especially from developing economies
- Provisions (reduced costs and/or streamlined processes) for applicants meeting the above criteria
2 Comments
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Re item 3 of the Agenda please note I find myself now in a personally challenging and very time demanding few weeks (which I expect to be altered before I leave for the SFO Meeting) and whilst I will attend and of course do what I can on list and in meetings held on this group I will be severely limited in what I can undertake further than making editorial comments to work drafted by others... Please accept my sincere apologies and regrets in advance. CLO
Hong Xue
Hi, unfortunately unable to to join the call but got a few points to think about.
1. Replacement of the Dispute Resolution Service Provider with an expert panel
Fully agree. But does it only cover MOPO DRS or all the categories, including trademark measures. Since UDRP, disputes involving trademarks have always been subject to DRS. It would be new to deviate from that direction in new gTLD process.
2.Reducing trademark "bullying" through modification of the time and language requirements of the URS mechanism
Trademark Bullying is a serious concerns but not limits to URS. In the PD-DRP proceeding, a registry can be bullied as well. And any applicant for a new gTLD string can be "deterred" by clearing house notice.