2018-06-06 New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Work Track 5

Notes/ Action Items

1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Review: No SOI updates

2. Feedback on Working Document:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BRzHr2FxSTYHX1I8F3FHSt6Bo1cvJsKyWX8WZXRUXAo/edit

-- Being developed by staff under the direction of the Work Track co-leaders.

-- Intended to summarize perspectives and key points raised in Work Track discussions and on the Work Track mailing list.

-- Document does not attempt to evaluate the level of consensus in support of the different ideas and positions.

-- Once the co-leaders have held consensus calls, information about consensus level will be added to the document.

-- Document is a work in progress and will continue to evolve. Additional content will be added as discussions continue.  

-- Not a public document at this time. It is for the WT 5 members to review and comment.

Slide 6: Structure of the Working Document

-- Change the name of the document: “Working Document Toward Preliminary Draft Report of WT5”.

-- Concerns/objections about some input to the document and number of WT members expressing opinions.

-- Economize on space devoted to 2007.

-- Structure: The questions that we are addressing is what are the terms and conditions for removing protections, or allowing protections subject to terms and conditions.

-- Document seems more like the preparation for a preliminary report, rather than a preliminary report itself.  Premature to think we are in the state of preparing a preliminary report.  More like a document zero.

-- Troubling to hear that the policy decisions of the Supporting Organization (GNSO) charged with developing recommendations are a waste.

Slide 7: Structure of the Working Document

-- The high-level structure mirrors sections of the Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group Initial Report:

a. What is the relevant 2007 policy and/or implementation guidance (if any)?

b. How was it implemented in the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program?

c. What are the preliminary recommendations and/or implementation guidelines?

d. What are the options under consideration, along with the associated benefits / drawbacks?

e. What specific questions are the PDP WG seeking feedback on?

f. Deliberations

g. Are there other activities in the community that may serve as a dependency or future input to this topic?

3. ICANN62 Planning Update:

Two Cross Community Sessions planned:

-- Session 1: Monday 25 June from 15:15-16:45: Background, Progress and Timeline, Validation of Preliminary Outcomes, Brainstorm Session - Looking for solutions within the existing geographic names process

-- Session 2: Thursday 28 June from 15:15-16:45: Recap of Monday Session Two Discussion Topics (TBD)

-- GAC Communique drafting is on Wednesday afternoon: https://62.schedule.icann.org/meetings/699454 -- 15:15-16:45 27 June

-- How will these cross-community sessions be organized and what is the format?

4. Discussion of Potential Areas of Agreement - Geographic Names in the AGB other than city names:

Slide 12: Geographic Names: 2012 Applicant Guidebook

-- Non-objection letter has helped a lot and not sure why we should change it.

-- The Working Document is a compilation of views, not a consensus document.

-- How to reconcile these views?

[general discussion of views for or against consent/non-objection, as also expressed on the email list and/or stated previously]

-- Third bullet on slides 12 -- the link in page 28 of the document does not resolve to the "Composition of macro geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and selected economic and other groups" list.

5. Discussion of City Names - time permitting:

Slide 14: City Names

-- Don't see the logic of comparing the size of the city.

-- Arbitrary thresholds for cities don't help us.  Cities change/move.

-- Should not be liberal in giving out pre-emptive rights.

-- Import to look at the principle of being respectful of local laws and policy for what is a city in each country.

6. AOB (5 mins): None.