Page History
...
For other places see: https://tinyurl.com/y99fhj7n
Info |
---|
PROPOSED AGENDA
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS Section 1.5 Application Submission_28Apr2018.pdf Section 1.6 Application Processing_27Apr2018.pdf |
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Tip | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Dial outs: Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Kavouss Arasteh Apologies: Katrin Ohlmer, Susan Payne, Maxim Alzoba, Jim Prendergast, Rubens Kuhl, Keith Drazek, Phil Corwin, Annebeth Lange |
Note |
---|
Notes/ Action Items Action Items:
Notes: 1. Roll Call/SOIs: No updates. 2. Review of the Initial Report (continued). * The purpose of this review is to ensure that preliminary outcomes and deliberations are accurately captured and written in an understandable manner. The WG Co-Chairs have sought to make clear that this exercise is not intended to re-open substantive discussions, which is better served by the submission of public comments and subsequently when reviewing public comments received. As a reminder, please note that a resource page has been set up on the Wiki to track the distribution of Initial Report sections, which you can find here: https://community.icann.org/x/NwUhB. As you can see in the link, the following sections have been released: 1.2: Overarching Issues 1.4: Pre-Launch Activities 1.5: Application Submission 1.6: Application Processing 1.7: Application Evaluation/Criteria 1.10: Contracting 1.11: Pre-Delegation 1.12: Post-Delegation -- Administrative Item: Please limit your intervention on the specific items we are covering to 2 minutes and if a second intervention please try to keep it to 60-90 seconds. Section 1.5: Application Submission 1.5.4: Applicant Support -- Scope in this area for joint financing. -- Not sure who are the “gTLD purchases” (page 17). Not sure of that terminology and think we should use more conventional language. -- Quite reasonable that an applicant that doesn’t meet the requirements of the ASP should be given an opportunity to pay. -- Careful with the language – Seems to suggest that if you don’t meet the requirements of the ASP suggests that you would transition to a standard application, but that application could be a community one. Need to use a term other than “standard application”. -- Question re: #5: Is there an ICANN definition of "Global South"; Does the term encompass underdeveloped regions or territories of rich countries? Same question about “middle countries”, though we do define it ourselves. I wonder if an indigenous tribe in Canada or US, or the "inner city" would be "Global South". Answer: The way it was discussed in the WG, indigenous tribes were an example but not expressly noted as "Global South". Question re: #7: -- Were Community Priority Evaluation fees considered in this discussion? Would the Community Priority Evaluation Fees something that could be supported, because these aren’t small. Answer: I think a direct response is that no, the community-based application connection was not discussed. It would probably need to be discussed after the Initial Report or as a public comment, since it was not already discussed? While not specifically referred to, some members of the group may have assumed all were included. Since it was not discussed i think it is an important item to flag to ensure that a discussion does occur at some point. Also, what is included in ICANN annual maintenance fees. Consider including a footnote. From the chat: from Justine Chew to All Participants: Thanks @CLO. @Christa, perhaps just add a reference pointing to the source for "ICANN annual maintenance fees". Tx. From the chat: -- from Justine Chew to All Participants: @Greg, agree with you on attorney fees. But I am also thinking we may need to be careful to deal with unintended thoughts of "Why only attorney fees, and not other applicable professional fees?" -- from Martin Sutton to All Participants: Perhaps "reasonable and relevant fees" could capture this? -- “Attorney Fees” – Don’t see where that fits in here. If it is to write the application, then that’s included in the application. Otherwise it could significantly increase covered fees. -- ICANN has to be protected in territorial disputes at the local level. [No suggestion for a textual change.] -- Section f. Deliberations: What are “gTLD purchasers”? The only purchaser is the final registrant. Who is referred to here? 1.5.5: Terms & Conditions -- Caveat: Don’t tie ICANN down to restrictive conditions – jurisdiction of incorporation of a registrant. In 2012 a certain number of registries deliberately registered in tax havens. -- WG homework: WG members should review and comment on the list if the preliminary outcomes and deliberations are not accurately captured and written in an understandable manner 3. Next Meeting: 21 May, 15:00 UTC. |