Logo

051040040 RPMs in all gTLDS PDP WG - Shared screen with speaker view
Terri Agnew
12:29
Please review ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en
Ariel Liang
15:34
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SmXWvS9M4TAtQ3gC3o4j9-jHaw3uIlWR_2D3lV2vvTU/edit?ts=5f7c569f
Maxim Alzoba
16:18
jitter in audio
Griffin Barnett
16:40
Paul’s audio I breaking up, presumably since he is “up the mountain”
Griffin Barnett
16:43
*Is
Maxim Alzoba
16:55
I understand the but about mountain
Susan.Payne
16:56
Paul is sying he is now the IPC Policy Co-Ordinator - volunteer
Marie Pattullo
17:50
Pics of mountains always, always welcome!
Griffin Barnett
22:22
Shouldn’t the language starting with “Some WG members” be in the context?
Maxim Alzoba
22:53
then the first part should start the same way
Mary Wong
24:05
@Griffin, @Maxim and all - that’s what staff would like clarity from the WG on, as to what part of the text goes into the Context.
Julie Hedlund
24:29
@Griffin: Sorry if it isn’t clear, but the language starting with “Some Working Group members” is in the context.
Griffin Barnett
24:42
From the highlighted text?
Griffin Barnett
25:07
That we Kathy read earlier?
Griffin Barnett
25:14
*That Kathy read earlier?
Julie Hedlund
25:43
@Griffin: Sorry too misunderstand. The proposal is that the highlighted text would be moved to the context if the WG agrees.
Julie Hedlund
25:57
*to
Griffin Barnett
26:08
OK I see, thank you
Maxim Alzoba
27:59
reservation is not limited to specification 5
Maxim Alzoba
28:31
and thus it should contain not limited to
Alan Woods (Donuts / RYSG )
28:36
+1 Agree with Maxim and David. The exclusion of Spec 5 3.3 of the RA is confusing .
Griffin Barnett
29:05
I tend to agree with David that listing some but not exhaustive examples of allowed practice should be removed; I would suggest adding the word ‘otherwise” in the first sentence of the IG
Alan Woods (Donuts / RYSG )
29:07
I understand it is 'such as' but I don't see what examples are adding.
Griffin Barnett
29:18
(That is otherwise compliant…)
Mary Wong
29:33
@David, @Maxim, @Alan and all - thank you. Staff was merely trying to capture what we understood had been discussed and/or suggested during prior WG calls, as examples to illustrate the main sentence.
Maxim Alzoba
29:38
it is extremely limited number of cases
Griffin Barnett
29:48
Otherwise, I support moving the rest of the highlighted text to context
Alan Woods (Donuts / RYSG )
29:49
Fully appreciate that thank you Mary.
Ariel Liang
30:11
Please note that staff captured David’s suggestions as comments on the side
Philip Corwin
30:30
Can we have a link to the doc for this?
Ariel Liang
30:38
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SmXWvS9M4TAtQ3gC3o4j9-jHaw3uIlWR_2D3lV2vvTU/edit?ts=5f7c569f
Maxim Alzoba
30:58
drop. it, it is extremely limiting registries without basis
Ariel Liang
32:19
Alternative sentence suggestion: “...extremely high pricing during the Sunrise Period of the domains that correspond to trademarks recorded in the Trademark Clearinghouse..."
Philip Corwin
32:38
In a personal capacity, I strongly support David on his points, especially regarding what should be listed under Context
Mary Wong
32:42
Last week, several WG members suggested trying to improve the Implementation Guidance text instead of immediately moving language to the Context. Staff therefore provided both options in the text, as you now see, for WG discussion.
Susan.Payne
32:51
sorry, could you put in the chat what the sentence is that you are proposing to delete? Not clear to me for the discussion
Susan.Payne
33:05
from the discussion - sorry
Ariel Liang
33:46
@Susan - David was proposing to delete this in the first paragraph under implementation guidance: “such as the Approved Launch Program (ALP) as well as the reservation of domain names as required in Specification 5 of the base Registry Agreement applicable to the 2012 New gTLD Program round.”
Susan.Payne
34:04
ok, thanks Ariel
David McAuley (Verisign)
35:07
I wasn't following chat but am now
Griffin Barnett
35:31
So Maxim’s point is that he agrees with David?
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
35:39
I think we already agreed that this would be deleted?
Mary Wong
35:52
@Brian, yes.
Julie Hedlund
36:37
@Kathy: I think Maxim is agreeing with David to delete the text.
Ariel Liang
36:46
We have highlighted
Maxim Alzoba
37:28
yes, that orange should be replaced with comma
Griffin Barnett
37:38
I think you mean a period
Maxim Alzoba
37:49
yes, ;)
Maxim Alzoba
38:22
just registered with TMCH at that period of time
Maxim Alzoba
38:33
TMCH entries change over time
Julie Hedlund
38:48
As Ariel notes, there seems to be agreement to amend the ALP text and move the rest of the text to context with David’s suggested changes. And staff will circulate the revised version to the list.
Julie Hedlund
39:17
@Griffin: We’ve captured that change.
Mary Wong
39:31
Basically, closing out this recommendation by (1) moving the highlighted text to the Context; (2) deleting the orange part of the Implementation Guidance and insert the word “otherwise”; and (3) taking David’s textual changes.
David McAuley (Verisign)
41:16
I support Griffin's 'otherwise'
Michael R. Graham
41:50
+1 Griffin's "otherwise"
Julie Hedlund
42:20
To Brian’s point, staff has captured all of the changes and will circulate the revised version to the list.
Julie Hedlund
42:35
Any questions or further comments should be raised to the list.
Ariel Liang
43:00
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qjiKBaAAMNPctSIwP932OKT6vrgkFXxdVYVf6DAz2no/edit
Ariel Liang
43:40
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1huKNcgg3VAk95oybb-7u9papLZ4kEMUHNQNElMPWMFY/edit#heading=h.udqhr3c883uo
Mary Wong
45:35
We apologize; we just noticed an error in the first sentence of Rec 9 - it should be guidance to “Examiners” rather than “Providers” regarding the language of a proceeding/Determination.
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
49:28
Would it be possible to share the link to this Doc in the chat?
Julie Hedlund
49:55
There are two docs. Here they are: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qjiKBaAAMNPctSIwP932OKT6vrgkFXxdVYVf6DAz2no/edit
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1huKNcgg3VAk95oybb-7u9papLZ4kEMUHNQNElMPWMFY/edit#heading=h.udqhr3c883uo
Julie Hedlund
50:15
One is for Rec #9 and one for converted proposal #34.
Griffin Barnett
51:51
The schools of thought are not really exclusive, bc at least presumably registrants should be using a registration agreement in a language they understand
Griffin Barnett
51:55
But anyway
Julie Hedlund
52:34
@Kathy: We will update the Public Comment Review following today’s discussion. The current text reflects previous WG discussions.
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
58:16
But a Cyrillic IDN new gTLD may be based out of Malta...
Maxim Alzoba
58:38
+1'or Singapore
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
58:45
(Just as a hypothetical example)
Griffin Barnett
01:00:13
As I explained, the registrar is listed in WHOIS…. From that you can locate their registration agreement and thus the language in which their registration agreement is written
Griffin Barnett
01:01:08
There are potentially some registrars who may provide a registration agreement in more than 1 language but usually they identify which version controls so that would be the controlling language
Maxim Alzoba
01:01:17
also there might be IDN script/language in non IDN TLD
Marie Pattullo
01:01:41
Mine always takes me to Flemish Google.
Maxim Alzoba
01:01:52
like something IDN.nonIDN
Griffin Barnett
01:02:55
Brian’s is a good point too… many registrars are located in very unusual jurisdictions for business reasons, e.g. Bahamas, Grand Cayman, etc. not sure that should be relevant; again though, so long as these are all just identifying potential factors for an Examiner consider should they believe it necessary to deviate from the default (language of registration agreement) then I am not strongly opposed to enumerating these potential factors
Mary Wong
01:04:10
It seems that the WG is agreeing that it will be helpful to provide all involved (from registrants to Examiiners) with a clear rule as a starting point, but with sufficient flexibility built-in to allow for an alternate language if the circumstances warrant.
Maxim Alzoba
01:04:23
registry 'talks' to - registrar only
Maxim Alzoba
01:04:43
language of the agreement is not a part of TLD records
Maxim Alzoba
01:05:25
reseller 'talks' to registrar (other registrar can act as a reseller too)
Griffin Barnett
01:06:52
My original proposed merger had some language that retains some more of the wording from Rec 9
Griffin Barnett
01:07:01
If staff may want to look at that
Griffin Barnett
01:07:48
Also let’s not forget this is all guidance to the IRT, the actual guidance we are talking about to examiners will be prepared by the IRT
Kathryn Kleiman
01:08:01
could Staff please highlight 4 and 5?
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
01:08:23
I would not leave it at "whether it is possible to ascertain" but say that somehow via implementation, the provider *is able* to ascertain.
Zak Muscovitch
01:09:26
From Griffin's original proposal: This potential guidance could also consider the relevance of other factors, such as the language requested by either party, the predominant language of the country or territory of the registrant, the language used by the registry and/or predominant language of the country of the registry, if different from that of the registration agreement, and the language used by the registrar and/or predominant language of the country of the registrar if different from the language of the registration agreement.
Griffin Barnett
01:09:27
Ok.....
Ariel Liang
01:09:31
Posting Griffin’s language on screen
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
01:09:45
BTW, don't forget that aside from fake information, given P/P and GDPR we may never know the location of the registrant.
Maxim Alzoba
01:10:21
registrar and registry have to understand English and local language
Maxim Alzoba
01:11:00
but resellers might not be able to speak/understand English
Maxim Alzoba
01:11:25
the same about registrant
Griffin Barnett
01:12:06
Just note that my text should refer to URS Examiners not providers
Griffin Barnett
01:12:24
I think others have noted that; a mistake in my original bullet
Petter Rindforth
01:12:53
Agree - makes it more simple and possible to understand
Ariel Liang
01:13:41
sure
Brian Beckham (WIPO)
01:13:45
Just to note that the highlighted text presumes we know the RA language -- that is our starting point
Julie Hedlund
01:18:08
See the document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qjiKBaAAMNPctSIwP932OKT6vrgkFXxdVYVf6DAz2no/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]
Mary Wong
01:20:35
The IRT comprises community volunteers.
Griffin Barnett
01:21:49
The IRT, with the option of consulting with interested parties outside the IRT itself….
Maxim Alzoba
01:28:07
thanks all
David McAuley (Verisign)
01:28:10
Thanks Kathy, staff and all
Julie Hedlund
01:28:11
Confirming that there is nothing else on the agenda for today
Zak Muscovitch
01:28:12
Thanks for chairing, Kathy!
Griffin Barnett
01:28:12
Thanks all, productive call
Philip Corwin
01:28:16
Well done