00:15:33 Gopal Tadepalli: Greetings. - Dr. T V Gopal, Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, Guindy Campus, Anna University , Chennai, INDIA.
00:16:32 Jonathan Zuck: Gonna call for volunteers to supply them
00:16:42 Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org: To follow along with the RTT: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net]
00:17:56 Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org: I believe Lutz is on the call?
00:18:20 Alan Greenberg: No@Olivier, nothing for me on my topics.
00:18:24 Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org: Yes, thank you Lutz
00:20:28 Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond: noted @Alan. Thanks
00:21:40 Alfredo Calderon (ICANN73 Mentor): Welcome to all ICANN73 Fellows on the call.
00:24:11 Admin: @alfredo nice to see the Fellows joining the call
00:25:08 Sivasubramanian M: If it is a significant IGO name with a significant number of misdirected visitors to the website, the lengthy process perpetuates the harm to the IGO, (in cases where there is harm to the IGO whose name is taken), is
00:25:27 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: What about costs for a failed IGO action?
00:26:11 Bill Jouris: @Siva, not to mention the harm to the users whose queries were misdirected.
00:26:17 Sivasubramanian M: Shouldn't there be an interim process to neutrally disable the domain name by an expedited directive?
00:26:37 Sivasubramanian M: @Bill yes.
00:26:46 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: Should the IGO be liable for the respondents costs if the IGO loses the action?
00:28:07 Alfredo Calderon (ICANN73 Mentor): How long will the process take for an IGO to go through the flowchart in case of an ‘arbitration required”?
00:28:17 Jeffrey Neuman: The solution is functional, but I highly doubt it will be used very often. But that is an acceptable outcome as well. IGOs will be comfortable in filing UDRPs and registrants have a backstop I. The unlikely case that they lose and want it to be reheard.
00:29:01 Jeffrey Neuman: That issue is a detail to be worked out
00:29:08 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: Thanks.
00:31:24 Jonathan Zuck: Arbitration isn't much different than a court action
00:32:26 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: Thanks, Jeff. What was worrying was a retro-active landgrab of all overlapping existing domain names rather than newly domain names.
00:33:03 Justine Chew: @Jonathan, yes, but the key difference would be the immunities and privileges element doesn't "obstruct" the arbitration proceeding,
00:33:44 Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org: To follow along with the RTT: https://www.streamtext.net/player?event=ICANN [streamtext.net]
00:35:22 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: The trademarks generally make the difference and there will rarely be responses with obvious cybersquatting cases.
00:36:49 Sivasubramanian M: new hand
00:40:39 Sivasubramanian M: If Jeff was referring to the absence of registrant response at the start of the UDRP process, and if 90% of the registrants do not respond as he stated, could the same process of iinabsentia arbitration award in favor of the IGO be applied pre-arbitration in favor of the IGO, provided there is an earnest effort to reach the registrant who refuses to respond
00:41:28 Justine Chew: Arbitration has to be participated by both parties!
00:43:16 Bill Jouris: Perhaps a *temporary* response in favor of the complaintant after a short period for a response. Not locked until a longer time is allowed for response, but resolving the complaint in order to minimize immediate harm.
00:43:20 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: Are the response times sufficient to cope with the added delay of having to go through a WHOIS privacy service? (Might be more of a UDRP question.)
00:44:54 Justine Chew: @John, with UDRP and URS, service providers have to contact the relevant registrar to get the registrar to inform the relevant registrant.
00:45:41 Justine Chew: This is the EPDP on IGO Curative Rights
00:46:11 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: @Justine. Yep. It is one area where there could be possible problems as the respondent may have to hire a lawyer to file a response.
00:46:55 Justine Chew: @Bill, the domain name being locked is built into the UDRP process. "Locking" has a specific meaning.
00:46:57 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: It is probably a UDRP/URS issue as the respondent will be engaged in the process if it goes to arbitration.
00:48:47 Jeffrey Neuman: I was not aware that there was anything in my tone. But at the end of the day the UDRP is the outcome of a GNSO policy development process. The ALAC is always free to provide its own advice. But as far as I am aware the ALAC has been well represented in this PDP.
00:49:45 Jeffrey Neuman: I am not aware of any requests from IGOs that have not been addressed. Even the questions raised here were not raised by IGOs. I am not saying they are bad questions, but they are not questions that have been raised to the geoup
00:51:08 Jonathan Zuck: I was just going to ask
00:52:02 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: The OFB-WG will be taking a final look at the ICANN Bylaws Amendments during their meeting tomorrow.
00:52:26 Holly Raiche: Happy to comment on that item
00:52:41 Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC-Participant): Hello all - apologies for joining late
00:53:29 Jeffrey Neuman: Can you please send the link
00:53:38 Jeffrey Neuman: I need to put my input in.
00:54:18 Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org: https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+Workspace%3A+Name+Collision+Analysis+Project+%28NCAP%29+Study+2+Documents
00:55:04 Jonathan Zuck: more preparatory documents
00:55:06 Jeffrey Neuman: I think that we should thank the group for all of the work they have done, but we reserve our comments to the report.
00:57:10 Justine Chew: The NCAP Study 2 Report is way more interesting and "controversial"
00:58:22 Justine Chew: NCAP DG = Name Collision Analysis Porject Discussion Group
00:58:56 Jeffrey Neuman: There are many ways to read the data from a tech perspective.
01:00:07 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Makes perfect sense @Justine
01:01:45 Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org: Wiki page:https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186778158
01:03:47 Holly Raiche: Looks like a really interesting session
01:04:19 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: The ALAC agenda will be updated shortly.
01:04:40 Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC-Participant): Thanks Heidi
01:04:51 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: I believe it will be GNSO issues.
01:05:00 Jonathan Zuck: I'm not sure what his agenda is. I'll try to sort it out and circulate on the list
01:05:01 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: Maureen invited him as a guest speaker.
01:05:51 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: I would have thought you should be in the loop though @Justine GNSO Liaison role appropriate IMO
01:06:18 Justine Chew: Apparently not @Cheryl :(
01:06:55 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: *sigh*
01:07:44 Chokri Ben Romdhane: thank you all have a good night
01:09:55 Alfredo Calderon (ICANN73 Mentor): Apologies, leaving for another call. Have a wonderful afternoon, evening, etc. Stay well and safe!
01:11:56 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: Topic of Philippe’s discussion with the ALAC: What’s on top in the GNSO for 2022 that At-Large will probably wish to take note of to prepare for their participation.
01:12:02 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: A Community View an ALAC Statement and an Individual view agreeable to the others or not are all separate but interrelated things Minority Reports are dealt with as attached to Report s to allow the preservation of those views to follow the Reports' 'lifecycle' processes
01:12:38 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Absolutly correct approach IMO @Justine!
01:12:40 Holly Raiche: Thanks Heidi
01:13:10 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: in fact it states that is what a representative or Liaison must do in the ALAC RoPs
01:13:20 Justine Chew: You are not alone in @Christopher, in terms of time investment :)
01:13:35 Holly Raiche: Time is an issue for everyone on the call
01:14:02 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Indeed @Holly
01:14:32 Mouloud Khelif - ICANN73 Fellow: Where do we find the details for the next ALAC meeting? will it be announced through ALAC - Announce mailing list ?
01:14:55 Avri Doria: I question Christopher's interpretation of why the ODP came into existence.
01:15:11 Holly Raiche: The ALAC Calendar lists all of the meetings
01:15:25 Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond: on alac.icann.org
01:15:37 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: Hi Mouloud, several announcements will be sent ahead of the ALAC meeting on various At-Large lists.
01:15:50 Mouloud Khelif - ICANN73 Fellow: Thanks @Heidi
01:17:02 Justine Chew: @Siva, I don't disagree with what you are saying. I personally think that some of us have to work within the existing system and some of us need to work on improving those systems. :)
01:17:25 Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org: Please join the sessions during ICANN73 Prep Week. Of particular interest, the Policy Team Webinar tomorrow, Thursday, 24 Feb @ 13:00 UTC. :) You must be signed in and registered to view the schedule: https://go.icann.org/3rVEO2r
01:17:33 Michelle DeSmyter - ICANN Org: Next meeting is Wednesday, 02 March at 13:00 UTC
01:17:45 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: and some of us can attempt both @Justine :-) Bye for now then...
01:17:50 Roberto Gaetano: actually next Tue. is Mardi Gras
01:18:07 Herb Waye Ombuds: Take care everyone… stay safe and be kind
01:18:07 Roberto Gaetano: we should have a fun and entertaining meeting
01:18:28 Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org: Thanks all, see you next week!
01:18:29 Justine Chew: Yes, goodo @Cheryl. I don't have the capacity for both.
01:18:34 Roberto Gaetano: ooooppss . but we meet on Wed - Ash Wednesday…
01:18:38 John McCormac - HosterStats.com: Thanks/Later all.
01:18:38 Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC-Participant): thank you all - bye for now
01:18:46 Heidi Ullrich - ICANN Org: Thanks, All.
01:18:56 Cheryl Langdon-Orr: Bye!!
01:19:00 Mouloud Khelif - ICANN73 Fellow: Thank you ! It was my very first CPWG call !
01:19:05 Marita: Bye. See you all soon.
01:19:08 Evin Erdogdu - ICANN Org: Welcome Mouloud!
01:19:12 Hadia Elminiawi (ALAC-Participant): welcome Mouloud
AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
ALAC Liaisons and Representatives
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
