Logo

051040040 New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group call - Shared screen with speaker view
Karen Lentz
01:16:12
yes
Jim Prendergast
01:16:14
ye
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:16:14
yes
Paul McGrady
01:16:19
Exciting call!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:16:34
Gremlins!
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:18:37
Where ICANN is the evaluator, the Accountability Mechanisms should apply rather than instituting new appeals mechanisms. It's duplicative. But what does ICANN org say about this?
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:20:37
Not always a ByLaws issue. It also says "failure to take into account relevant information when making the determination". Accountability Mechanisms are not limited to ByLaws as far as I know.
Susan.Payne
01:20:37
agree with Jeff, also RfR and IRP are a different test
Paul McGrady
01:21:22
+1 Susan
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:21:28
What about the fact that we will have to advise clients to do BOTH?
Susan.Payne
01:22:58
what is your concern Anne when thinking about BOTH - the timing to bring an IRP?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:26:30
Timely indeed @Susan!
Annebeth Lange
01:28:02
+1 Susan
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:28:32
yes Susan - and that would be very helpful. Just trying to avoid waste.
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:29:41
I'm okay with flagging the issue of duplication and waste if there are two proceedings at once
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:30:19
Excellent Noted @Anne
Annebeth Lange
01:31:25
+1 Anne, useful
Emily Barabas
01:31:51
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QY2ChMLEvTNIumpKl65XTVcSYNMaUhucE1YQsepwk-Q/edit#gid=1163822586
Susan.Payne
01:34:27
apologies, I have a conflict and have to drop
Paul McGrady
01:36:08
Hard to disagree with Christopher on this one. I know we talked about this on a number of occasions, but it is still the right thing to do.
Greg Shatan
01:36:50
Need to drop. Sorry.
Annebeth Lange
01:36:54
@Christopher, with “all languages”, do you mean the UN languages? You know, there will always be so many around the world that will not have a version in their language.
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:38:00
Agree it's best to bring them closer
Kurt Pritz
01:38:39
As a policy statement we could say “take measures to translate as quickly as possible” rather than debate 2 mos vs 3 mos
Steve Chan
01:39:00
You can see the relevant recommendations on page 53 of the report: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/draft-final-report-new-gtld-subsequent-21sep20-en.pdf
Annebeth Lange
01:39:03
+1 @ Kurt
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:39:23
Perhaps strengthen the intent to have them out *together* or as close as possible
Martin Sutton
01:39:24
Fine- thx Jeff
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:39:57
=1 Cheryl
Annebeth Lange
01:40:06
You could always say as soon as possible, but not later than 2-3 months
Alan Greenberg
01:40:19
"As quickly as possible" is NOT acceptable.
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:40:32
*+1 Cheryl
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:40:58
Language to the list then see what we can agree at next call
Karen Lentz
01:41:04
Apologies I have to drop now; will follow up re any questions
Steve Chan
01:41:24
As currently stated, the “must” is no later than 2 months prior to launch. But there is implementation guidance about all translations being available as close as is practicable.
Donna Austin, GoDaddy Registry
01:41:52
So seems we have it covered Steve.
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:43:15
It's hard not to use "legal jargon" or "complicated words" when talking about appeals mechanisms.
Annebeth Lange
01:43:49
Make it as “readable” as possible for non-English speakers
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:44:09
leave it to the IRT
Kurt Pritz
01:44:40
There is a term of art: “plain English” with standards for it available
Alan Greenberg
01:44:41
If we cannot come up with examples or more guidance, we can't expect the IRT members to.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:45:01
Also the Style guide used
Donna Austin, GoDaddy Registry
01:46:00
Perhaps Steve and Emily can get to the heart of what the issue is with the comment that will be helpful for our response.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:46:11
I think the term plain language is the term we use
Alexander Schubert
01:46:54
Agree!
Donna Austin, GoDaddy Registry
01:47:08
Excellent point Annebeth. That's good context.
Maxim Alzoba
01:47:09
the reason is - English version is the only one from the legal perspective
Alexander Schubert
01:47:53
Even IF there was a version in German: I wouldn't even look at it. I want the original - only that one will be authorative.
Alexander Schubert
01:48:12
+1 Maxim
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:48:40
HOw much MORE do we need to say
Emily Barabas
01:48:49
It’s a set of standards
Emily Barabas
01:48:56
https://www.plainlanguage.gov/about/definitions/
Jim Prendergast
01:49:02
coming back to my earlier point - yet another reason we need to define terms.
Steve Chan
01:49:08
Hand up
Annebeth Lange
01:49:09
@Jeff, agree
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:49:23
Sure shif the IG into the Rec might strengthen
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:50:16
putting the Plain Language pert into 12.4 will not be a negative though
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
01:55:55
sounds good
Donna Austin, GoDaddy Registry
01:55:58
Agree with linking
Katrin Ohlmer
01:58:45
It is about the angle bracket issue!
Katrin Ohlmer
01:59:12
It caused a lot of additional work, at the last minute.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:59:26
Yep, will do!
Martin Sutton
01:59:50
I have angle brackets in my garage Katrin, would that help? :-)
Katrin Ohlmer
02:00:10
If you send them to ICANNorg, yes ;-)
Martin Sutton
02:00:45
Will do!
christopher wilkinson
02:02:52
@geographical terms: Please note that some of us retain very strong reservations over the WT5 report and are very disappointed that the PDP itself never reviewed in detail the political implications of the recommended policy.
Maxim Alzoba
02:03:16
thanks all
Paul McGrady
02:04:05
@Jeff - maybe Staff is saying something less than how we are reading this. Can we ask them to rephrase?
Marc Trachtenberg, Greenberg Traurig, Chicago
02:04:13
I think ublikely ICANN will give on this one
Marc Trachtenberg, Greenberg Traurig, Chicago
02:04:56
I hear what you are saying but do not think they will view it that way
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
02:06:01
Agree with Donna
Marc Trachtenberg, Greenberg Traurig, Chicago
02:06:03
This is not the one to fall on the sword for
Donna Austin, GoDaddy Registry
02:06:22
As I said, we need to discuss further within the group Jeff
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
02:06:35
Thanks everyone, good progress today, remember the preparation for next calls topics which are -> [20] Application Change Requests; [24] String Similarity Evaluations; [35] Auctions ALSO a few things to the list for deliberation on list and then review for next call as noted in the AI's from today. Next Call is 2000 UTC on Nov 2... Bye for now...
Anne Aikman-Scalese, Lewis Roca Tucson, AZ
02:06:36
Could we adopt some language from the Temp Spec?
Paul McGrady
02:06:40
+1 CLO - let's tack this on to the front of next call
Annebeth Lange
02:06:58
Bye for now, have a wonderful weekend!
Martin Sutton
02:07:33
Thx Jeff & Cheryl