This is the wiki page for At-Large comments on the objection statement on community objection grounds against applicant "DotHealth, LLC" for the applied for string ".health"

Information about the applicant DotHealth,LLC

(updated March 6 2013 with link to PIC)

Provided by http://gtldresult.icann.org/) :

String
Applicant
Location
Community
Geographic
Primary Contact
Email
Application ID
Updates
GAC EW
PIC
HEALTHDotHealth, LLCUS  Mr. Andrew Ryan Weissbergweissberga@gmail.com1-1684-6394YesYesYes

The applicant details can be viewed at http://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationdetails/495

Link to applicant Public Interest Commitments (PIC) : https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/40930487/PublicInterestCommitments_DotHealthLLC030513FINAL-0001.pdf

 

Objection Statement produced by the gTLD RG for RALO review

The PDF of the objection statement can be viewed at draft-objection-statement-against-applicant-DotHealth-LLC-for-.HEALTH-25-feb-2013.pdf

Members of the gTLD RG considered the comments from the At-Large community as of February 8 2013 and ranked each factor of the four tests for community objection grounds based on these comments and discussions.
gTLD RG members gave the factors of the 4 tests a "pass" and therefore, an objection statement was drafted by the gTLD RG based on this initial review. 


Comment on this objection statement

Please review the initial comments that were received by the gTLD RG. At-Large members are encouraged to read and post comments. 

 

NOTE: You must be logged in to post comments. If you do not have a wiki account, please email your comment to the gTLD RG group at  newgtldrg@icann.org and the group will update this wiki page.

 

The gTLD RG reserves the right to remove comments that do not adhere to ICANN's Expected Standards of Behavior and Open Comment Forum Process and Standards.

 



  • No labels

20 Comments

  1. Comment received from International Medical Informatics Association
    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/attachments/20130125/469ed997/IMIArequesttoALAC-0001.pdf 

    Request to consider an Objection for the “.health” new gTLDs

    Dear Sir or Madam,

    This note is to request the ALAC to consider filing an objection for the applications for the “.health” new gTLD, on Community objection grounds. Currently there are five applications for “.health”, four of which are in English and one in Chinese script. These five proposals are seen as problematic by the global health community for the following reasons:

    1. None of the applicants demonstrates that the name will be operated in the public interest.
    2. None of the applicants demonstrates adequate consumer protection mechanisms.
    3. All of the applicants are commercial in nature and none represent the health community.

     

    Basis for Community Opposition to the ‘.health’ TLD applications

    In 2012, a number of stakeholders expressed concerns about the creation of the new “.health” gTLD by current applicants and requested that its allocation, in all UN languages, be postponed to allow for the consultation of global health stakeholders. Examples include:

    • The governments of France and Mali have issued ‘Early Warnings’ for the five “.health” applications
     

    • A number of NGOs in official relations with the World Health Organization (WHO) have posted Comments on the ICANN Public Forum and written to ICANN and the Government Advisory Committee (GAC)

    • WHO has written to ICANN and the GAC 

     • The European Commission has issued a letter to ICANN, noting ‘.health’ among others, as a sensitive string 
    (http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/steneberg-to-icann-boardannexes-27nov12-en

    The concern of the Community is along the following lines:
     

    • The “.health” TLD should be a trusted resource for health, in particular to counter current international challenges such as fraud, identity theft, illicit sale of pharmaceuticals, security, protection of minors and so on. 
    • There is no guarantee that the new “.health” TLD will be operated in the interest of global public health and consumer protection.
    • The “.health” TLD without the adequate quality assurance and consumer protection mechanisms in place will undermine credibility and harm the growth of the health online market place. An open and unrestricted TLD will help to bypass regulatory controls creating new risks for the whole industry sector. 
    • Developing countries will suffer the most in this scenario, due to their difficulties in enforcing national policies to regulate, monitor, and stop fraud and misuse. 


    We have read the conditions for Community Objection grounds, and believe there are sufficient grounds on which to make an objection. We would be pleased to provide further detailed information, based on an analysis of the applications and with the health community, to support the Objection, should you decide to proceed.

     

    Best regards,

     

    Antoine Geissbuhler
    President of the International Medical Informatics Association

  2. Email received from Antonine Geissbuhler, International Medical Informatics Association: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-February/000326.html

    Dear Dev,
    Please find attached an Overview file and the Health Community Objection Table, as requested.

    Health Community Objection 20 Feb 2013.pdf

    Health Community Objection table.pdf

  3. Email received from Andrew Weissberg  http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-February/000333.html 

    Attachment to this email : InformationforIMIA_DotHealthLLCand.health-0001.pdf

    Hello Dev,
    
    In this case that Antoine may have not shared this information with
    you or your colleagues in the ALAC New gTLD Review Group, I thought it
    might be useful toward your continued preparation of objection
    statements against applications for the .health gTLD, including the
    DotHealth, LLC application.
    
    Very truly yours,
    Andy Weissberg
    
    
    From: Andrew Weissberg <andyw at dothealthgtld.com>
    Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:05 AM
    To: <antoine.geissbuhler at gmail.com>
    Cc: Neil Posner <neil.posner at digitalpublishingpartners.com>, Richard
    Butcher <richardobutcher2 at gmail.com>, "john.horton at legitscript.com"
    <john.horton at legitscript.com>, "Neuman, Jeff"
    <Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us>, Jose Rasco
    <jose.rasco at straatinvestments.com>
    Subject: Information Regarding DotHealth, LLC and its .health TLD Application
    
    Hello Antoine,
    
    I am reaching out on behalf of DotHealth, LLC in response to the comments and recommendations
    you shared with the ALACNew gTLD Review Group on 1/26/13. https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/.health_OG We have prepared the attached information for your review in support of the IMIA's continued
    deliberations with the ALAC New gTLD Review Group surrounding the potential filing of
    community objections against applications for .health.

    The attached document aims to ensure that you and the RG have a clear understanding of our proposed plans and approaches for the .health TLD, and how these are fully aligned and credibly positioned to address the issues
    and concerns that you have raised to the ALAC in support of public health interests. Respecting and appreciating that the IMIA is an important and prominent NGO constituency
    of the World Health Organization (WHO), and given the numerous references to the WHO's concerns
    and positions regarding .health as referenced within your comments, I also feel that it is
    important, timely and appropriate to also share this information with the
    Innovation Directorate of the WHO. Apart from our views that an ALAC community objection
    against the DotHealth, LLC application for .health is neither reasonable or plausible,
    we believe such an objection does not fall in alignment with the WHO Executive Board's recent policy
    paper and Member State discussions surrounding .health and health-related domain names. As you and your colleagues in the ALAC New gTLD Review Group continue to review and
    finalize plans surrounding .health, I would welcome the opportunity to engage directly regarding these matters.
    Sincerely, Andy Weissberg Andy Weissberg Co-founder and CEO DotHealth, LLC 201.906.2967 Andyw at dothealthgtld.com

     

    Attachment to this email : InformationforIMIA_DotHealthLLCand.health-0001.pdf

     

  4. Question from Garth Bruen. gTLD RG member

    "Dev,

    In reviewing the details of this objection in preparation for the RG statement I have come to some curious questions. The IMIA did not file an objection to .MEDICAL which is a word that actually appears in title of the International Medical Informatics Association. The .MEDICAL application is also by Donuts, so all of the IMIA's objections to the Donuts .HEALTH application would not only apply to .MEDICAL and in a more targeted sense. .MEDICAL is also uncontested which would make the objection less complicated. A similar question could be asked about the .HEALTHCARE application, also an uncontested Donuts application. I am interested in knowing why "health" is more important or potentially harmful than these other strings (also .DENTIST, .DENTAL, .DOCTOR, .HOSPITAL, .SURGERY).

    Thanks"

     

    1. Reply from Antoine Geissbuhler : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-February/000353.html


      Dear Dev,
      Apologies for the late answer, but I was travelling in poorly connected areas. We had discussions about the issue of the many names that are related to health and healthcare,
      not even considering their possible translations. IMIA's priority is to make sure that one TLD can be protected and identified as a
      safer place for health information. The name is well within the scope of IMIA's mission, and meets the need to preserve
      the name for the global health community. Regarding the other names mentioned,
      some are also facing the issue that they may be regulated in some
      countries, e.g., .doctor, .dentist, but these names are all too limited and specialized
      to be a good fit for IMIA to object to (even medical). I hope that this clarification helps,
      With kind regards, Antoine Geissbuhler
  5. Email received from Andrew Weissberg Feb 25 2013  : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-February/000357.html

    Hello Adela and Dev,
    In continuing to review the draft of the community objection being prepared, and having seen in the draft's section on "targeting," I thought it would be helpful to clarify a few important items with respect to this issue as it relates to the DotHealth, LLC application for the .health TLD.
    In the current draft, there is a statement:
    "Point 18(a) and (b) descriptions mention as stakeholders the following categories: physicians and healthcare professionals, institutions (health services) and patients (consumers), as well as the associated industries (pharmaceutical industry, medical tourism, food industry, health insurance, etc)." 
    Clarifying points and for the RG's consideration:
    1. Question 18(b) in the AGB requested that applicants provide answers to the following questions (note those words which are italicized or bold-faced type below):
      • How do you expect that your proposed gTLD will benefit registrants, Internet users, and others?  Answers should address the following points:
    • What is the goal of your proposed gTLD in terms of areas of specialty, service levels, or reputation?
    • What do you anticipate your proposed gTLD will add to the current space, in terms of competition, differentiation, or innovation?
    • What goals does your proposed gTLD have in terms of user experience?
    • Will your proposed gTLD impose any measures for protecting the privacy or confidential information of registrants or users? If so, please describe any such measures.
    At no point has DotHealth suggested in its application that it would explicitly or implicitly target a “community of health” as part of its standard application to ICANN for the .health TLD.  However in order to adequately, sufficiently and appropriately answer the above questions, we expressed our expectations that that .health will appeal to a large, broad, diverse and international addressable market of registrants spanning all major segments of the human health, personal care and animal health industries. Furthermore,  appropriate reasoning was provided and further explained by example. As contained within the DotHealth, LLC application and specifically as part of its answer to Question 18(b), the following statements were made:
    “DotHealth also envisions that physicians, hospitals and other provider organizations throughout the world will value .health as a safe and reliable resource for communicating and exchanging information with patients and caregivers about their practice or services."
    "Because “health” can be associated beyond “wellness” or “disease,” we believe that numerous other market segments and industries outside of the “health” industry will find .health to be an attractive domain name solution for positioning their organizations, products, programs and services.  For example, restaurants, which offer “health-conscious” menu options, could utilize .health domain names for specifically marketing or promoting them to consumers.  For those engaged in the medical tourism arena, travel and hospitality-related businesses (e.g., hotels or cruise ships) could utilize .health domain names to promote their locations on a “health-related” basis.   Employers may wish to utilize .health names for their businesses in support of disseminating information about health insurance programs or services they make available to employees.  Major technology companies which provide solutions and services to multiple industries might find .health useful for distinguishing their product⁄service information and resources that specifically cater to health or health stakeholders.
    Throughout our application to ICANN, we have repeatedly stated that our mission is to establish .health as a safe, trustworthy and secure top-level domain for global health stakeholders.   To ensure success, we have identified and orchestrated a policy framework and numerous safeguards that are designed to mitigate abusive registrations and malicious behaviors which may pose harm to registrants and consumers, or which may otherwise threaten the integrity and stability of the .health registry.
    None of the above, however, should serve to inappropriately construe that DotHealth, LLC will explicitly or implicitly target the broad and diverse addressable market of registrants we have identified, particularly with respect to doing so as a matter of "detriment" or "harm" for that matter.  Furthermore, many other portions of our answers to Question 18(b) and throughout our application — specifically within our answers to Questions 22, 28, 29 and 30 serve to reinforce the important reasoning for which we have identified and committed to implementing the numerous policies, safeguards, security protocols, and governance measures in support of the safety and protection of public health and end-users — and particularly those cited by the IMIA in support of the ALAC's proposed community objection to applications for .health.     
    Lastly, the Review Group may want to revisit other information that ICANN has requested of new gTLD Registry applicants throughout the AGB which are relevant to issues of "targeting."  
    For example, in Question 48, ICANN provides "criteria" to which applicants must address with respect to the "target markets" an applicant has identified:
    "Funding commitments may be conditional on the approval of the application. Sources of capital funding required to sustain registry operations on an on-going basis are identified. The projected revenues are consistent with the size and projected penetration of the target markets."
    Although ICANN has not publicly posted any of the applicants confidential information or answers in support of these questions, I feel it is important that the review group recognizes these issues as being relevant and considered in the context of targeting.  
    As the ALAC New gTLD Review group continues its deliberations surrounding community objections to the DotHealth, LLC application, I hope all of the above is useful and would be happy to discuss on a call if needed.
    Best regards,
    Andy Weissberg
    Andy Weissberg, Co-founder and CEO
    DotHealth, LLC
  6. Email from Andew Weissberg: 

    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000387.html

     

    AttachmentPublicInterestCommitments_DotHealthLLC030513FINAL-0001.pdf

     

     

    From: Andrew Weissberg <andyw at dothealthgtld.com>
    Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:58 AM
    Subject: Our PIC Specification - DotHealth, LLC (.health)
    To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee at gmail.com>
    
    
    Hi Dev,
    
    In the event that you feel its helpful or appropriate to share with
    your peers in the ALAC, I've attached a copy of the DotHealth, LLC PIC
    Specification for the .health TLD.  Having just scanned the ICANN New
    gTLD web site (https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus),
    I noticed that as of now, most PIC's haven't yet been appended to the
    publicly-available portions of the applications.
    
    All my best,
    Andy

     

     

  7. Email from Andrew Weissberg : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000390.html

     

    FYI, as received - Dev Anand
    
    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: Andrew Weissberg <andyw at dothealthgtld.com>
    Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:36 PM
    Subject: In response to Eric Brunner Williams' Comments
    (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/002351.html)
    To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee at gmail.com>
    Cc: Richard Butcher <richardobutcher2 at gmail.com>, "Neuman, Jeff"
    <Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us>, Neil Posner
    <neil.posner at digitalpublishingpartners.com>
    
    
    Hello Dev,
    
    I am responding to the comments assertions which were made by Eric
    Brunner-Williams at Wed Mar 6 18:20:02 UTC 2013, which are duly noted
    and accessible at
    http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/002351.html.
    
    For the record, and for the ALAC's full clarification and understanding:
    
    We indeed promptly shared the DotHealth, LLC PIC Specification with
    the ADG of the World Health Organization (WHO) via e-mail (9:34PM
    Eastern Time on 3/5/13), as well as with the leadership and primary
    contact points at the NABP and our other supporting organizations on
    3/5/13 - roughly hours after it had been submitted to ICANN.  We also
    provided background information surrounding the ICANN
    request/recommendation for PIC specifications.  If necessary, such
    individuals can be directly contacted regarding these matters, and for
    which I'd be happy to attempt to facilitate if needed.
    Today, we posted the DotHealth, LLC PIC specification on our web site
    (http://dothealthgtld.com/news.html) and which was uploaded to the
    ICANN New gTLD web site less than 3 hours ago.
    The "modality" of such commitments (as Eric suggests in his comments)
    are in direct response to WHO Executive Board Resolution 10.5, the
    follow on directives from the WHO's Director General for this tabled
    resolution, as well as in consideration of DotHealth's previous,
    current and continued dialogue with the Assistant Director General of
    the WHO regarding the .health TLD and the DotHealth, LLC application
    (https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/495)
    
    As it has been advised that only members of the ALAC should be posting
    comments on its community forums, and having respect for these
    established processes and rules, I will leave it to you to decide on
    how this information is further communicated to your colleagues and
    peers in the ALAC.
    
    Sincerely yours,
    Andy Weissberg
    
    Andy Weissberg, Co-founder & CEO
    DotHealth, LLC
    
  8. Message from Célia Boyer, Executive Director Health On the Net : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000393.html

    Attachment : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/attachments/20130306/33a49e3f/06-March_2013_Objection_support_docHealth_HON_NGO-0001.pdf


    Dear Sir or Madam, Please find attached the official letter from the Health On the Net, an NGO organisation which support*s highly** At-Large New gTLD Review Group for *_*considering filling an Objection to the 5 proposed .health gTLD applications (including the .health application in Chinese).*_ Thank you very much for your consideration. Yours sincerely Célia Boyer Executive Director Health On the Net -- ______________________________________________________ CéliaBOYER Executive Director *H*ealth *O*n the *N*et Foundation NGO in Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Tél: +41 22 3726250 - Fax: +41 22 3728885 - Web: http://www.HealthOnNet.org


  9. Reply from Dev Anand Teelucksingh, gTLD RG chair to Joan Dzenowagis, World Health Organisation (WHO) Geneva 
    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000395.html



    Dear Joan Dzenowagis, Thanks for your email. By reply I am posting this to other members of the gTLD Review Group (gTLD RG) in charge of coordinating the process by which the ALAC can object to new gTLD applications (see PDF at http://bit.ly/how-ALAC-files-objection-to-new-gTLD for a summary of this process) Currently, 5 objection statements are undergoing Regional At-Large Organisation (RALO) review and all can be viewed at this page : https://community.icann.org/x/soxwAg Discussion by the RALOs on the applicants and the objection statements can be viewed on the RALO mailing list archives NARALO : http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/thread.html APRALO : http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/apac-discuss/2013/thread.html LACRALO : https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40931651 (web page) Any comments you wish to send re: objections statements will be uploaded to the appropriate webpages for the objection statements for viewing by the At-Large community as well as the ALAC which will be considering the RALO advice on Friday March 8 2013. Any such comments should be sent before the ALAC call on Friday March 8 2013. Kind Regards, Dev Anand Teelucksingh gTLD RG chair On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:57 PM, DZENOWAGIS, Joan Helen <dzenowagisj at who.int> wrote: > Dear Dev,

    I'm aware that there are questions about the above objections, some of which relate to WHO.
    We would appreciate the opportunity to address them directly, as some of the assertions by
    an applicant are inaccurate and/or misleading and this must be corrected.

    As you know, we have previously written to ICANN about our concerns and we are working
    within the ICANN process as we understand it. A number of global NGOs also share our concerns
    and have asked how they can support the objection. I would appreciate your guidance on how
    they can do this.

    > I hope you can accommodate the time difference in your deliberations, as it is 24.00hrs in Geneva,
    to give us the chance to respond. Thank you for your consideration.

    > Joan Dzenowagis, WHO Geneva
  10. Reply from Dev Anand Teelucksingh, gTLD RG chair to Joan Dzenowagis, World Health Organisation (WHO) Geneva 
    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000395.html



    Dear Joan Dzenowagis, Thanks for your email. By reply I am posting this to other members of the gTLD Review Group (gTLD RG) in charge of coordinating the process by which the ALAC can object to new gTLD applications (see PDF at http://bit.ly/how-ALAC-files-objection-to-new-gTLD for a summary of this process) Currently, 5 objection statements are undergoing Regional At-Large Organisation (RALO) review and all can be viewed at this page : https://community.icann.org/x/soxwAg Discussion by the RALOs on the applicants and the objection statements can be viewed on the RALO mailing list archives NARALO : http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/thread.html APRALO : http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/apac-discuss/2013/thread.html LACRALO : https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40931651 (web page) Any comments you wish to send re: objections statements will be uploaded to the appropriate webpages for the objection statements for viewing by the At-Large community as well as the ALAC which will be considering the RALO advice on Friday March 8 2013. Any such comments should be sent before the ALAC call on Friday March 8 2013. Kind Regards, Dev Anand Teelucksingh gTLD RG chair On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:57 PM, DZENOWAGIS, Joan Helen <dzenowagisj at who.int> wrote: > Dear Dev,

    I'm aware that there are questions about the above objections, some of which relate to WHO.
    We would appreciate the opportunity to address them directly, as some of the assertions by
    an applicant are inaccurate and/or misleading and this must be corrected.

    As you know, we have previously written to ICANN about our concerns and we are working
    within the ICANN process as we understand it. A number of global NGOs also share our concerns
    and have asked how they can support the objection. I would appreciate your guidance on how
    they can do this.

    > I hope you can accommodate the time difference in your deliberations, as it is 24.00hrs in Geneva,
    to give us the chance to respond. Thank you for your consideration.

    > Joan Dzenowagis, WHO Geneva
  11. Email from Andrew Weissberg : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000396.html

     

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: Andy Weissberg <andyw at dothealthgtld.com>
    Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:31 PM
    Subject: Follow up Answers to EBW Questions
    To: "devtee at gmail.com" <devtee at gmail.com>
    
    
    Hello Dev:
    
    In response to the questions raised by Eric Brunner Williams in this
    post: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/007152.html
    
    1. Is the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the ADG
    within his or her official capacity within the World Health
    Organization?
    
    Yes.  This dialogue has been direct with the ADG who is officially
    responsible for the WHOs resolutions for e-health and health-related
    domain names.
    
     2. Is the representation that this dialogue was is not merely
    informative and/or interrogatory?
    
    This dialogue is and has been informative for both parties, although
    in no respect should it be considered as being "interrogatory."  We
    assume that the ADG will respectfully share the WHOs official views
    surrounding engagement between the parties.
    
     3. Is the representation that "Executive Board Resolution 10.5"
    relates specifically and directly to the DotHealth LLC application?
    
    The EB Resolution is related to numerous issues pertaining to e-health
    and health-related domain names, including and not limited to
    applications for the .health TLD (see item #23, pg. 5). The resolution
    and related follow up material are public record:
    
    http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB132/B132_24-en.pdf
    http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un_geneva/documents/eu_statments/who/20130128_who-eb132_-_item_10.5_ehealth_health_internet_domain_names_en.pdf
    
    http://www.ghwatch.org/who-watch/eb132/ehealth
    
    On a related note, and to eliminate any further confusion as a matter
    of future comments, questions or assertions, please also inform Mr.
    Brunner-Williams that the correct representation of my last name is
    Weissberg, not "Weissman."
    
    Best regards,
    Andy W.
    
    
    
    
    
    On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams
    <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
    > On 3/6/13 11:50 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote:
    > > A follow-up to the prior note from Mr. Weissman and relayed by Dev,
    > not necessary to today's NARALO question, but relevant to the claims
    > advanced prior to March 8th:
    >
    > Mr. Weissman writes, inter alia, that:
    >
    >> as well as in consideration of DotHealth's previous,
    >> current and continued dialogue with the Assistant Director General of
    >> the WHO regarding the .health TLD and the DotHealth, LLC application

    > > I've the following questions:
    > > 1. Is the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the ADG
    > within his or her official capacity within the World Health Organization?

    > > 2. Is the representation that this dialogue was is not merely
    > informative and/or interrogatory?

    > > 3. Is the representation that "Executive Board Resolution 10.5" > relates specifically and directly to the DotHealth LLC application?

    > > I've tried to phrase these as questions to which the likely answer is
    > a simple "yes".

    > > I trust that competent answers will be forthcoming prior to the point
    > in time when the ALAC considers the present objection and Mr.
    > Weissman's counterclaims.

    > > Eric Brunner-Williams

    > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
    https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > --

     

     

  12. Email from David Abreu, COHRED - Council on Health Research for Development : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000397.html

    Dear Sir or Madam,
    
    
    
    I am writing on behalf of the Council on Health Research for Development –
    COHRED, an international not-for-profit organisation with the mission to
    improve health, equity and development by supporting countries to develop
    strong research and innovation systems. We work globally, but prioritise
    low and middle income countries.
    
    
    It has come to our attention that you are considering filing an Objection
    to the 5 proposed .health gTLD applications (including the .health
    application in Chinese).
    
    
    We share the concerns of the International Medical Informatics Association
    as noted in their letter of 25 January 2013:
    
    ü  The ".health" TLD should be a trusted resource for health, in particular
    to counter current international challenges such as fraud, identity theft,
    illicit sale of pharmaceuticals, security, protection of minors and so on.
    
    
    
    ü  There is no guarantee that the new ".health" TLD will be operated in the
    interest of global public health and consumer protection.
    
    
    
    ü  The ".health" TLD without the adequate quality assurance and consumer
    protection mechanisms in place will undermine credibility and harm the
    growth of the health online market place. An open and unrestricted TLD will
    help to bypass regulatory controls creating new risks for the whole
    industry sector.
    
    
    
    ü  Developing countries will suffer the most in this scenario, due to their
    difficulties in enforcing national policies to regulate, monitor, and stop
    fraud and misuse.
    
    
    We hereby lend the voice of COHRED and our country partners to this
    Objection.
    
    
    
    Sincerely,
    
    -- 
    
    *David Abreu, MBA*
    *Head
    Web for Development
    Geneva
    +41 22 591 89 11
    Skype: david_abreu
    *-------------------------------------------------------------------------
    COHRED - Council on Health Research for Development
       *Incorporating the Global Forum for Health Research*
    1-5 Route des Morillons
    1211 Geneva 2
    P.O. Box 2100
    Switzerland
    Tel: +41 22 591 89 00
    
    www.cohred.org
    
    New Resources: 20th Anniversary
    <http://www.cohred.org/20th-anniversary/>, COHRED
    Publications <http://www.cohred.org/publications/cohred-publications/>
  13. Email from Martine Berger, Health Innovation in Practice : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000398.html

    Attachment : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/attachments/20130307/6fc6a2b6/DGHletterobjectiondothealth_March2013-0001.docx


    Please find attached a letter of support for filing an objection to the 5 proposed ".health" TLD applications. We thank you in advance for your consideration, On behalf of the Democratising Global Health Coalition Martine Berger, MD, PhD, MPH Director, Health Innovation in Practice Ecumenical Centre 1-5 route des Morillons 1211 Genève Suisse Tel: +41 22 7989852 Mob:+41 78 6280176 mberger at hip3.org skype: berger.hip
  14. Email from Vanda Scartezini http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000398.html

     

    I am becoming a little worry about these objections to common names. I saw
    health for instance. The complaint states:
    
    1.   None of the applicants demonstrates that the name will be operated in
    the public interest.
    
    2.   None of the applicants demonstrates adequate consumer protection
    mechanisms.
    
    3.   All of the applicants are commercial in nature and none represent the
    health community.
    
    Well, who said it cannot be a commercial?  Who said was mandatory to
    represent any community?  Why they need to operate in the public interest
    and not in the private one? And besides, NET, for instance, that is also a
    word in English, now in all languages, has the same approach, and does not
    follow any of the statements above.  Where is the fairness of the process? 
    
    The number of objection like this one is becoming big and if ICANN  doesn’t
    make a move  to  clarify the rights of these applicants, I believe ICANN
    will be sued  from many fronts, and more relevant, we will NOT have any
    competition at all, since only common names have any attraction to the
    public to jump and buy a domain under that name, others are brands.
    
    That was the main intention of this new gTLD program, that may risk to be
    lost.
    
    I am  really becoming worried about the way things are going.  We cannot
    dismiss applicants for issues they were not supposed to commit under their
    application to new gTLD program.
    
    In time, I did not applied for any gTLD, so my comment  is because I am not
    seeing any fair approach in these complains. 
    
    All the best, 
    
    Vanda Scartezini
    Polo Consultores Associados 
    IT Trend
    Avenida Paulista 1159 cj 1004
    01311-200 São Paulo,SP, Brasil
    Tel + 5511 3266.6253
    Mob + 5511 98181.1464
    
     
  15. Email from Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, Assistant Director-General, Health Systems and Innovation, World Health Organizationhttp://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000400.html

    Dear Sirs,
    
    Following the extensive exchange of comments between Eric Brunner-Williams and DotHealth LLC, 
    the World Health Organization (“WHO”) would like to clarify that WHO does not and will not endorse
    or support any particular applicant for .health. WHO has engaged in informative dialogue with
    all applicants with a view to ensuring that the names and acronyms of WHO and its Regional Offices
    will be appropriately protected at the second level within the .health TLD, should it be delegated,
    and with a view to understanding whether and how the applicants are proposing to operate
    the .health TLD in the interest of global public health. However, WHO has not entered into any consultative or advisory process with any of the applicants
    on the development of their policies, commitments or applications in general. Representations by any applicant in that regard would be incorrect and misleading. For the avoidance of doubt, WHO should also like to clarify that the WHO Executive Board
    has not adopted any resolution, 10.5 or otherwise, on the .health TLD and/or the possible engagement
    of WHO with any of the applicants. On another related note, WHO notes that the
    string "健康<http://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationdetails/450>" has
    been translated as “healthy” instead of “health”, and that this difference is used to argue that the
    objection should not proceed. WHO should like to inform the ALAC that the official
    WHO translation of "健康<http://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationdetails/450>"
    is “health” in English. In French it is “santé”, and in Spanish “salud”.
    WHO would therefore ask that the ALAC reconsiders the
    translation of "健康<http://gtldresult.icann.org/applicationstatus/viewstatus:viewapplicationdetails/450>" and
    use instead the official WHO translation in determining whether the Objection should proceed or not. We thank you very much for your attention. Best regards, Dr Marie-Paule Kieny Assistant Director-General Health Systems and Innovation World Health Organization Avenue Appia 20 CH1211-Genève 27 Switzerland Tel: +41 22 791 35 91 Fax: +41 22 791 49 09 E-mail: kienym at who.int<mailto:kienym at who.int>
  16. Email from Andy Weissberg, Co-founder and CEO, DotHealth, LLC : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000405.html

    Attachment : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/attachments/20130308/6b741311/LettertoALAC_.healthobjections_030813-0001.pdf

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: Andrew Weissberg <andyw at dothealthgtld.com>
    Date: Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:17 AM
    Subject: Community Objections for the .health TLD
    To: admin at ttcsweb.org, ocl at gih.com, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee at gmail.com>
    Cc: Neil Posner <neil.posner at digitalpublishingpartners.com>, "Jose I.
    Rasco" <r at straat.co>, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us>
    
    
    3/8/13
    
    Dear Mr. Teelucksingh and Dr. Crepin-Leblond:
    
    We respectfully share the following correspondence with you (attached)
    surrounding community objections for the .health TLD.
    
    Sincerely,
    
    Andy
    
    
    Andy Weissberg, Co-founder and CEO
    
    DotHealth, LLC
  17. Email from Prof. S. Yunkap Kwankam, PhD | Executive Director, International Scoiety for Telemedicine and eHealth ISfTeH) :
    http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/2013-March/000407.html

    Attachment : http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/newgtldrg/attachments/20130311/81bb8d7f/LettertoICANNatLargeCommMarch2013-0001.pdf

     

    Dear Sir / Madame,
    
    We hereby lend our voice to the objection to the 5 proposed .health gTLD applications by At-Large New gTLD Review Group - see attached letter. Thank for you consideration.
    
    regards,
    
    Yunkap
    Prof. S. Yunkap Kwankam, PhD | Executive Director, International Scoiety for Telemedicine and eHealth ISfTeH)
    Chemin des Champs-Blancs 94 | 1279 Chavannes-de-Bogis, Switzerland
    Phone: +41 22 796 6238 | Cell: +41 79 369 0998 | Web: www.isfteh.org