Zoom chat: 2021-05-12 At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG)

15:38:18 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Welcome to the At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group (CPWG) Call taking place on Wednesday, 12 May 2021 at 13:00 UTC.
15:38:32 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Agenda: https://community.icann.org/x/CQLQCQ
15:58:36 From Lianna Galstyan to Everyone:
Hi everyone
15:59:23 From Evin Erdogdu to Everyone:
Hello all, welcome!
16:00:12 From Priyatosh Jana to Everyone:
hi everyone
16:01:49 From Roberto to Everyone:
Folks, I apologise, I have another call ongoing that I cannot quit, will keep just a look an the chat and the slides for the first 1/2 h
16:03:10 From Satish Babu to Everyone:
Hi everyone!
16:03:11 From Carlos Raul Gutierrez to Everyone:
Olivier you can lower the volume of you mic please, thank you
16:03:19 From Evin Erdogdu to Everyone:
Hello all, welcome
16:03:59 From K Mohan Raidu, ISoc India Hyderabad Chapter to Everyone:
Greetings to all,
16:04:15 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
RTT Link: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN
16:04:37 From iPad (27)Vanda Scartezini to Everyone:
Hi everyone
16:04:40 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
I need to leave on the hour.
16:09:00 From Evin Erdogdu to Everyone:
Thank you Daniel
16:09:02 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Are there background documents, pointers to previous policy positions related to the Transfer Policy being discussed by this PDF
16:09:35 From Evin Erdogdu to Everyone:
@Siva, yes, please see: Workspace of the Transfer Policy Review PDP - https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP/Transfer+Policy+Review+PDP
16:13:11 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
your welcome Evin
16:13:57 From Herb Waye Ombuds to Everyone:
Greetings everyone.
16:14:08 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Evin I saw that page, and then sent the message
16:14:30 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
There are four or five topic heads and all relate to meeting agenda, list of participants etc
16:14:59 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
In one of the douments there is a subheading BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS but there is no link or no content under Background Documetns
16:15:38 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@ Siva. I think some documents should be on the GNSO site as well
16:15:54 From Satish Babu to Everyone:
@Yeşim, would it be possible to increase the text size in the Zoom window slightly? Kind of small for me...
16:16:55 From alberto soto to Everyone:
+1 Satish
16:17:14 From DANIEL K. NANGHAKA to Everyone:
thanks Alan well said
16:17:42 From Heidi Ullrich to Everyone:
Noted , Satish and. Alberto.
16:18:05 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Satish - you can increase the size of the screen on your end from the top drop down menu
16:20:05 From Satish Babu to Everyone:
Thanks Yeşim...it's better now.
16:20:06 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Satish - any better? Just Zoomed in at my side as well?
16:20:20 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Perfect, thanks
16:20:53 From Roberto to Everyone:
which drop down menu?
16:21:12 From alberto soto to Everyone:
Thanks Yesim
16:22:45 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
In the context of transfer policy, a rudimentary question: "What is in a name?" How do we define the importance of a domain name for a Registrant?
Google.com is important for Google Inc, 1) in terms of the Trade Mark value or the value of the NAME per se, and this is well understood. But what
is not formally acknowledged is the value of the assets tied to the domain name in use, for e.g a Website, a mailing list etc, which are in many cases
far more valuable than the intellectual property value of the domain name per se. Is the design of the transfer process such that the assets tied to
the Domain are smoothly transferred in a manner that the continuity of a website or a mailing list is undisturbed, or minimally disturbed? Is this
something that the transfer policy could examine? A loose scenario is to consider what would happen if facebook.com moves the domain from one
Registrar to another.. What happens to the facebook webspace? What are the strains that its web resource pointers and other pointers ar
16:23:46 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
,,,other pointers are subjected to
during the transfer?
16:26:09 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
@Sivasubramanian: Change of sponsoring registrar for a domain name will not necessarily change the service connected to the domain name, inc. website, email, etc
16:26:23 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
holly
16:27:36 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@Steinar This happens NOT to be the case always
16:28:56 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
A lot might depend on whether the DNS is handled by the losing registrar or by an external service such as Cloudflare etc.
16:29:27 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
The reason is unknown
16:29:32 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
DNS changes tend to be a lot more common than registrar changes comparing registrar transaction reports with zone file data.
16:29:54 From Lutz Donnerhacke to Everyone:
Sorry, I'm very late. Telco with a customer won't come to an end.
16:31:20 From Raymond Mamattah (ICANN70 Fellow) to Everyone:
Good afternoon. I nearly missed the meeting
16:31:25 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
How sad such recalcitrance
16:32:40 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
This could be behind the call for a ‘holistic review’
16:33:23 From Steinar Grøtterød to Everyone:
@John McCormac: I agree. An inter-registrar transfer can mess up a service if not being done correctly
16:33:59 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Had - ADIGO is trying to reach out to you without success, fyi. It keeps ringing, with no answer
16:34:43 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
*Hadia
16:36:20 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
The trouble with ‘guidance’ will be that the reason giving for no differentiation will be that, since it wasn’t required, not everyone will have put possible differentiation in place
16:38:24 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
Like all known privacy laws now differentiate between natural and legal persons
16:38:41 From hadia Elminiawi to Everyone:
so it is not only GDPR
16:39:18 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@ Hadia - it makes the opposition that much more difficult to understand
16:40:30 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Some of the European ccTLD registries have used natural/legal person differentiation due to different forms of business entity being used in their countries. (sole trader (natural person), company or PLC etc.
16:40:56 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
@ John - so why the holdout of the others?
16:41:27 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
@Holly Not sure. It is trying to merge a lot of jurisdictions and definitions.
16:41:43 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
The statement was well done and I agree with submitting it
16:42:16 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Please see the workspace: GNSO Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process Phase 1 Final Recommendations for ICANN Board Consideration - the statement draft is posted for comment: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=161809006
16:42:54 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Link to PDF: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=164626953&preview=/164626953/164627544/Draft%20ALAC%20Statement%20on%20RPM%20Phase%201%20Final%20Report.pdf
16:44:49 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
I’d be happy to vote for it
16:57:05 From alangreenberg to Everyone:
Need to leave now.
16:58:51 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Thank you for joining Alan
16:59:04 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Registry pricing is a very iffy topic as without the influx of brand protection registrations, some gTLDs have difficulty being financially viable. The Sunrise boost is a response to this.
17:00:15 From alberto soto to Everyone:
Sorry, I must withdraw. Thanks and regards!
17:01:11 From Jonathan Zuck to Everyone:
Well, a biz model based on defensive registrations is no biz model we want to support
17:02:03 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
@JZ That model would work against both TM owners and end users.
17:04:27 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Most of the gTLDs of the 2012 round were small scale. The .WEB might be where that Sunrise issue goes mainstream.
17:07:54 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Thank you Greg
17:08:16 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Good idea to consider Trade Marks as an important indicator of importance, but NOT as the only indicator of significant / rightful / sensitive names that the Registry should consider in some way 'special'.
17:08:19 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Think that a load of geographic/gov strings were protected for the launch of .EU ccTLD. It might be interesting to see how they did things with that but it would applying ccTLD logic to a gTLD. That's not always a good thing.
17:13:02 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Technically, it would be a few extra tables in a database. The real issue would be the source of the data.
17:14:26 From Holly Raiche to Everyone:
Thanks Greg
17:14:38 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Are there any excesses in the Trade Mark processes?
17:14:40 From Marita Moll to Everyone:
Great work Greg -- thanks for that.
17:14:42 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
Lol thanks Greg!
17:14:48 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
A search for Chocolate returns 6500 + resulsts
17:15:34 From Chokri Ben Romdhane to Everyone:
Qui sera qui sera, Olivier thank you all
17:15:35 From Raymond Mamattah (ICANN70 Fellow) to Everyone:
The best chocolate is from Ghana
17:16:22 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Is a Registry prohibitted from registering any of these 6500 + names by the regular process? And, if there is a string like "Brown Chocolate Avenue" registered as a Trade Mark, is the regisry prohibitted from offering brwon.gTLD ?
17:16:33 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
brown.TLD ?
17:16:38 From Marita Moll to Everyone:
Wow, I haven't heard anything formal. Nice to hear this has been accepted.
17:16:58 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
apart from being restrined to register brownchocolateavenue.TLD
17:17:06 From Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org to Everyone:
ICANN71, Virtual Policy Forum, 14-17 June 2021
17:18:02 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
In general, excesses (or unrestrained expansiveness) of the Trade Mark processes may have to be studied, even the above example isn't good.
17:18:18 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
... even if ...
17:19:58 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
some mischief : @Raymond.. Would it be good to reserve Chocolate.TLD for Ghana?
17:20:24 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
(like wine for Europe (winking)
17:20:42 From Yesim Nazlar to Everyone:
Next Call - 19 May at 19:00 UTC
17:21:06 From Herb Waye Ombuds to Everyone:
Take care all… stay safe and healthy & be kind :-)
17:21:06 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Chocolate would be a generic domain name, I think. :) But it would require a taste test for each application.
17:21:17 From iPad (27)Vanda Scartezini to Everyone:
I will post to our Skype a link to an article that we discussing at former board members
17:21:20 From Satish Babu to Everyone:
Thanks and bye!
17:21:21 From Natalia Filina to Everyone:
thanks Olivier and all!
17:21:22 From Raymond Mamattah (ICANN70 Fellow) to Everyone:
yes, that will do@Siva
17:21:24 From Roberto to Everyone:
Bye!
17:21:24 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
@ John Good idea to invent such parameters
17:21:25 From León Felipe Sánchez Ambía to Everyone:
Thanks everyone!
17:21:33 From Sivasubramanian M to Everyone:
Bye
17:21:37 From John McCormac - HosterStats.com to Everyone:
Later all/Thanks.