Page History

...

From: Hong Xue <hongxueipr@gmail.com>

Wiki Markup
Subject: Re: \[GTLD-WG\] Meeting Invitation / gTLD Working Group teleconference - Monday 05 December 2011 at 1400 UTC

Date: 2 December 2011 20:55:45 EST

To: ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org>

Cc: gTLD WG <gtld-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>

Hi, I cannot join the call but would like to provide my comments on objection process.

If reading from the Guidebook, we could see two specific references to At-large/ALAC objections:

1. Budget--but not clear if it is specifically for at-large to lodge objections to the DRP service provider (ICC);

2. RALO to ALAC process against community-base applications--it is still not clear how to involve individual ALSes.

On additional issue not in the GB: unlike GAC that is entitled to both objection process and independent early warnings, at-large objection seems limited to objection process and no other alternative.

Hong

Begin forwarded message:

From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <admin@ttcsweb.org>
Subject: GTLD-WG v1 of draft At-large Objection Process
Date: 9 December 2011 12:51:49 EST
To: At-Large GTLD WG List <gtld-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>

Dear All,

Here are some ideas on how the At Large objection process would work
for discussion here and on the Monday's conference call.

From a reading of the gTLD applicant Guidebook (AGB) athttp://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/rfp-clean-19sep11-en.pdf ,
pages 151-156 suggest that the ALAC only has standing to object to a
gTLD application on "Limited Public Interest Objection" grounds or on
"community" grounds if ALAC/At-Large is the community that is
explicitly or implicitly targeted by the gTLD.

1) ICANN posts the public portions of all gTLD applications considered
complete and ready for evaluation
(http://newgtlds.icann.org/program-status/application-results) within
two weeks of the close of the application submission period and starts
the Application Comment Period & GAC Early Warning of 60 days (subject
to extension, depending on number of applications) and 7 months for
objections.

2) Notice of public posting of gTLD applications would regularly be
sent (once a month) to all ALAC, At-Large and RALO lists.
Such notices would also be for discussion during ALAC and RALO
teleconference calls and updated to reflect any news pointing to
public comments
(http://newgtlds.icann.org/program-status/application-comments) and/or
Dispute Resolution Service Provider (DRSP) website updates during the
60 day comment period and 7 month objection period

3) Is there any applied-for gTLD string that ALAC or any RALO or RALOs
believe is contrary to generally accepted legal norms of morality and
public order that are recognized under principles of international
law?

4) If Yes, RALO (or a ad-hoc At-Large group) produces draft text
explaining the validity of the objection and why it should be upheld.
(draft objection statement to gTLD application document produced).
Such a statement should be shall be limited to 5,000 words or 20
pages, whichever is less, as per the objection process in the AGB

5) Draft objection statement to gTLD application sent to ALAC and
other RALOs for discussion.

6) Based on comments received, a final objection statement to gTLD
application is produced by the RALO or ad-hoc At-Large group.

6a) Repeat steps 3-6 for any other gTLD application that any RALO or
ALAC believes that is contrary to generally accepted legal norms of
morality and public order (Ideally, all objection statements should be
drafted, finalised and ready for all RALOs to review)

7) All RALOs vote on the final objection statement to gTLD
application to send as regional advice to ALAC to consider the
objection ;
at least 3 RALOs are needed to support the final objection statement
for ALAC to consider such advice.

8) If 3 or more RALOs vote to approve the final objection statement,
ALAC then considers and votes on whether to accept the majority of the
RALOs' regional advice to file an objection. If less than 3 RALOs
express support for the final objection statement, then ALAC does not
have to consider such objection statements not receiving RALO majority
support.

9) If ALAC's vote is yes, then ALAC notifies ICANN (to ensure that
ICANN will be ready to pay the objection filing fees) and in
coordination with ICANN, files the objection to the appropriate DRSP.
If ALAC vote is no, then no objection is filed ; RALOs and ALSes can
file public comments which may be acted upon by the Independent
Objector.

.