Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Javier Rúa-Jovet
24:28
None from me.
Martin Sutton
26:39
Helpful summary and recap, thank you
Poncelet Ileleji
27:01
Thanks for the summary
Javier Rúa-Jovet
27:18
thanks for great summary annnebeth
Emily Barabas
29:35
Full text of the comments is available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WKSC_pPBviCnbHxW171ZIp4CzuhQXRCV1NR2ruagrxs/edit?usp=sharing
Emily Barabas
30:01
As a reminder, the document currently on display is available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rsyxCEBd6ax3Rb_w1kms_E9n29XL1_lw3Yp9XQ4TeCY/edit?usp=sharing
Katrin Ohlmer
31:41
I'm here - yes, it is about IDNS
Annebeth Lange
33:09
Thanks, Katrin
Alexander Schubert
39:49
Christopher is right about th need to have consent - regardless what the "intention" of the applicant entity is! Applicants have usually no specific "intentions" at all: they want to make their shareholders happy. The question is: How will the PROSPECTIVE REGISTRANT use the gTLD?
Katrin Ohlmer
42:29
As mentioned in our comment, we would be ok with the small addition to handle non-ASCII terms identical to ASCII terms.
Susan Payne
42:41
@Alexander, I disagree. That ignores the control that Brands have over the allocation of names
Javier Rúa-Jovet
43:00
Thanks @Katrin
Javier Rúa-Jovet
43:31
...Just trying to get some bridge positions!...
Katrin Ohlmer
45:01
+1 Javier
Alexander Schubert
45:09
Agreeing with Christopher on his remarks on the TM Lobby!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
48:09
It has to be possible (I hope)...!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
49:46
We have noted your continued concern on this Christopher and so ag
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
49:46
i
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
49:48
n now
Javier Rúa-Jovet
50:15
Thx Christopher, your concerns are noted.
Colin O'Brien
50:21
I'm a litle confused by this logic Donuts owns .solar. There is a town in Northern Ireland called Solar. Are you saying that Donuts should not have been allowed to obtain the .solar gtld?
Marita Moll
50:43
Perhaps there should be a negotiation process, a panel or something to that affect to determine what happens with a name like "golden"
Abdulkarim Oloyede
51:16
I agree with Morita
Katrin Ohlmer
51:37
@colin: The geographic names panel should have reached out to Donuts about .solar.
Katrin Ohlmer
52:01
But I don't know if they've done so, I know they missed quite a few terms.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
52:12
geonames panel looks like a way forward
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
52:16
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
John Rodriguez
52:36
I continue to have concerns with overly broad claims of ownership/exclusivity to supposed geo terms especially when there is no association with the alleged place identified.
Katrin Ohlmer
52:36
@Javier: With much better processes - yes.
Susan Payne
52:37
@Katrin - why woud they? It did not fall within the AGB lists
Justine Chew
53:33
@Javier, geonames panel with sufficient expertise and research resources etc
Abdulkarim Oloyede
53:43
@Javier, that seams like the best way forward
Katrin Ohlmer
54:09
@Susan: because the geonames panel would have to verify if a support letter woudl be required or not.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
54:12
I believe that is what @Javier may indeed be referring to
christopher wilkinson
54:14
Support Advisory Panel, but a major issue over languages scripts and geographical knowledge etc.
Katrin Ohlmer
54:26
@Justine: Yes, exactly!
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
54:42
How would the proposed Advisory Panel be any different from the Geo Names Panel envisioned in the AGB?
Javier Rúa-Jovet
55:25
Point taken @Susan
Katrin Ohlmer
55:40
@Kristina: I remember that the proposal was to have GAC representatives being part of this panel.
John Rodriguez
55:55
+1@ Susan
Marita Moll
56:54
Maybe, as Christopher has suggested, all names should be assumed as geographic unless they can be proven otherwise. i.e. change the assumption
Javier Rúa-Jovet
58:01
great points @Martin
Colin O'Brien
58:03
There is a .charity. A wikipedia search indicates there are six geographical places called Charity see, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity How is possible to decide who gets to give permission? Does the gltd applicant have to get permission from each region.
Susan Payne
58:15
@Marita, why? Why are we according the geographic use primacy over other uses. There is no justification for that at law
Susan Payne
58:31
+1 Colin
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
58:54
@Marita - setting aside the lack of legal basis, how does that work in practice? The applicant has to submit global atlases that don't show the name?
Marita Moll
59:28
The justification is avoiding problems like .amazon
Bonnie Mtengwa
59:42
+1 Chris, I also support geo names panel with GAC members, it must not be just advisory in nature, but whatever it says must able be to stand. Remember all names especially of places have geo significance, and someone to claim they chose the name not for its geo significance is rather not true,
Katrin Ohlmer
59:54
@Susan: There are countries with national law which gives rights to geos over other entities.
Colin O'Brien
01:00:27
.mobile has been granted. There are three towns in America called Mobile. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile
Susan Payne
01:01:18
@Katrin - and there are plenty of countries which don't!
Colin O'Brien
01:01:28
.hosptial has been granted. There is a town in Ireland called Hosptial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital,_County_Limerick
John Rodriguez
01:02:12
A curative mechansim (rather than preventive) which addresses actual evidence of a false association with govt authority could be more amenable... but still have concerns with blanket and across the board prohibitions.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:02:44
@Susan: Correct. So we agree that some countries have national law which gives priority over geos, and some don't. So we cannot say "there is no law".
Susan Payne
01:03:42
+1 John that would be a more reasonable solution since it recognises context
Marita Moll
01:03:51
All of these examples justify, to me, the fact that there needs to be an intermediary body. There are no black and whites here. A negotiated solution is necessary
Chris Casavale
01:04:23
+1 John for curative mechanisms
Katrin Ohlmer
01:04:37
@Colin: These are all great examples that the geo names panel has to be equipped with the sufficient resources, as Justine pointed out.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:06:41
we hear you
Susan Payne
01:07:07
@Katrin I disagree - they demonstrate how ludicrous it is to give primacy to the geo use over others. Are you seriously suggesting that Hospital should be given a geo meaning over the standard English definition? Or are you suggesting some panel of Governments is goinbg to be charged with making that judgment on a case by case basis? Hardly giving anyone certainty!
Katrin Ohlmer
01:07:52
I would appreciate if we could agree to 1. The official language of the country/territory/capital city. and 2. Translations of the country/territory/capital city in UN languages and the addition of 3. Transliterations into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels. Otherwise capital cities such as Den Haag or São Tomé would not be able to be protected with denhaag/den-hag or sao-tome/saotome.
Colin O'Brien
01:08:14
Katrin .rogers has been granted. There are 26 places in the world called Rogers! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers It would take years to get clearance from each location. This seems like a solution in search of a problem.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:08:28
This should be do-able as the addition is also set-up in the red-cross protection list.
Alexander Schubert
01:09:35
Agreement: All placenames in ALL languages doesn't make sense.
John Rodriguez
01:09:39
Re translations, if we are trying to create expectation and certainty for future rounds, then just saying "any languages" doesn't necessarily create that expectation or certainty. So, being able to specifically point to specific translations (official languages or some sort) would be helpful in creating that expectation and certainty.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:09:41
@Colin: Neither the current AGB nor our discissions recommends to get clearance.
Susan Payne
01:11:35
@Katrin re your translation eg, I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I'm not clear on your item (3). The addition of "-" gets captured by a different provision doesn't it?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
01:12:06
To me, the definition of all languages seems to be overly broad - in researching I see https://iso639-3.sil.org/about/types mention "living languages" as distinct from extinct and ancient languages
Katrin Ohlmer
01:12:38
@Susan: To which provision you refer?
Susan Payne
01:13:06
3. Transliterations into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels. Otherwise capital cities such as Den Haag or São Tomé would not be able to be protected with denhaag/den-hag or sao-tome/saotome.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:13:15
Maybe we can take this offline and clarify?
Kristina Rosette (Amazon Registry - RySG)
01:13:21
Apologies - I need to drop for another meeting at the top of the hour.
Colin O'Brien
01:14:00
.hot granted. Two places called Hot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot
Susan Payne
01:14:14
yes maybe we can do offline
Greg Shatan
01:15:27
Can you repost the suggestions please.
Jaap Akkerhuis
01:15:45
There is really no such thing as a transliteration into ASCII.
julie.hedlund
01:16:13
From Katrin Ohlmer to Everyone: (10:48 AM)
I would appreciate if we could agree to 1. The official language of the country/territory/capital city. and 2. Translations of the country/territory/capital city in UN languages and the addition of 3. Transliterations into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels. Otherwise capital cities such as Den Haag or São Tomé would not be able to be protected with denhaag/den-hag or sao-tome/saotome.
julie.hedlund
01:16:27
With clarification of what is meant by #3.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:17:33
quiet...
David McAuley (Verisign)
01:17:40
I also must leave at this time, thanks Annebeth, thanks all.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:18:11
thanks @Kavouss
Steve Chan
01:18:25
It might be helpful to try and determine and identify any issues that may have arose as a result of the 2012 string contention resolution rules around geographic names. Similar to what Kavouss said.
Justine Chew
01:18:41
I would also appreciate some fleshed out text (per Jaapand some reasonable time onward with which to consult colleagues
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:18:50
hand by NKEM
Justine Chew
01:19:03
I would also appreciate some fleshed out text (per Jaap's comment) and some reasonable time onward with which to consult colleagues
Katrin Ohlmer
01:19:19
I remember that during our talks in Marrakesh someone pointed out that not all governments are able to participate - legally.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:20:11
in auctions
Katrin Ohlmer
01:21:16
Maybe we can refer this issue back to our GAC representatives in the WT5 - they shoudl better know if resolving contention via an auction is doable.
Martin Sutton
01:22:56
@Javier - that fits under non-AGB terms
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:23:24
yep
Nkem Nweke
01:25:01
Just would like to know if a Geo name is auctioned and later someday a ligitimate application from a government is made what happens
Jaap Akkerhuis
01:25:54
@Nkem: you have a conflict this group cannot solve
Susan Payne
01:26:29
I need to drop for another meeting I'm afraid
Annebeth Lange
01:27:06
Thank you, Susan
Katrin Ohlmer
01:27:15
@Nkem: As per the current AGB, the government has no rights.
Abdulkarim Oloyede
01:27:17
what if its a new country?
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:27:43
Anybody support the idea of putting concepts like "catalonia", "Basque Country", "Kurdistan", "Flanders" under a "protected" or "considered" non-agb catergory?
Abdulkarim Oloyede
01:27:43
agree we cant slove it all.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:27:49
A new country will have rights for a 2-character ccTLD
Justine Chew
01:28:22
@Nkem: Once a string is delegated and is not returned to the pool for some valid reason then it's gone.
Annebeth Lange
01:28:56
@Katrin, that is one of the reasons that they are protected -since it is not the responsibility of ICANN to decide what is a country and what is not
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:29:25
..."placenames with a stated claim to autonomy or independence" as geoname TLD
Colin O'Brien
01:29:48
Javier I wouldn't object to that idea if members of the community reach out to ICANN rather than ICANN trying to determine which terms should be blocked.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:31:30
good point @Colin
Justine Chew
01:32:00
@Colin, it shouldn't be ICANN determining which terms should be blocked, this is where the geonames panel could come in with input from the community.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:32:34
point taken @Greg
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:32:55
I am hearing some support developing for that approach @Greg
Katrin Ohlmer
01:33:17
@Colin: Also, we have to keep in mind to increase the predictability for applicants.
Chris Casavale
01:33:28
+1 Greg
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:33:42
a posteriori (curative) vs a priori (reservations/protections)
Colin O'Brien
01:33:59
@Katrin +1
Nkem Nweke
01:34:24
I'm on same page with @ Annebeth. let Geo names be.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:34:52
@Javier: Exactly, preventative are reliable, whereas curative rights lead to different results (like the objection procedures).
Justine Chew
01:35:04
I have said this before, and I will say this again -- if we were to rely more on curative rights, then curative right processes should be REALLY available to all and not just paid lip service.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:36:33
Well Noted @Justine
Greg Shatan
01:38:00
Curative rights should be relatively predictable and really available, or else they are seriously flawed.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:39:18
@Greg: They can't be predictable, that is the nature of i.e. the objection mechanisms. We had many examples in the last round, where similiar situations led to different results.
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:39:19
Curative approach puts the burden on governments, most of which are not really able to engage in objection processes
John Rodriguez
01:39:27
Preventative measures, can at times, ignore context.
Justine Chew
01:39:39
+1 Yrjo, communities also.
Marita Moll
01:40:04
+1 Yrjo and Justine
Colin O'Brien
01:40:07
My last post on gtlds that are also Geo names. Sorry for being repetitive but it is necessary to show how complicated things would be if all geo names must be cleared or barred as Christopher insists on every call. .dodge granted. 22 geographic names for Dodge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_(disambiguation).sling granted. There are two towns the United Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling.gap granted. There are six places in the world called Gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap.fidelity granted. There are three places in the United States called Fidelity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidelity_(disambiguation).target granted. There are two places called Target https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target.lilly granted. There are four places called Lilly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly.duck granted. There are two towns in the United States called Duck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_(disambiguation)
Greg Shatan
01:40:17
Yrjo and Justine, why do you believe that to be the case? And how can the issue be improved?
Vrikson Acosta
01:41:42
Bye. Got to go
Greg Shatan
01:41:45
+1 to John R., preventative measures work best when they are clear-cut regardless of context. Trying to use preventative measures to resolve nuanced situations is a mismatch.
Justine Chew
01:41:49
@Greg, a proper review of objection criteria for a start.
Greg Shatan
01:42:11
@Justing, that is certainly something we should be doing regardless....
Greg Shatan
01:42:19
“Justine”
Martin Sutton
01:42:23
Duck? really!
Justine Chew
01:42:55
@Greg, good let's do that regardless :)
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:43:28
For governments, cities and communities in developing countries - and in many developed ones, too - it’s hard even to be aware that somebody is eying their name as a possible new gTLD. Not to speak of initiating the objection proceedings etc
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:43:46
exactly @yrijo. Thx
Justine Chew
01:44:06
+1 Yrjo, we tend to forget that there is a wide world outside of ICANN.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:44:31
+1 Yrjo
Greg Shatan
01:44:34
So, we have identified awareness, objection criteria and some issue with initiating proceedings. Let’s continue the list.
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:44:35
You have actualy covered a *lot* o f ground today team....
Nkem Nweke
01:44:38
@Katrin +1 'Maybe we can refer this issue back to our GAC representatives in the WT5 - they shoudl better know if resolving contention via an auction is doable.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:45:10
good call!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:45:29
ciao, bye, to all!!!
Martin Sutton
01:45:35
Thank you Annebeth and all - enjoy the rest of your day
Katrin Ohlmer
01:45:37
Thanks, Annebeth!
Marita Moll
01:45:40
Bye all
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:45:40
Thanks everyone... do pursue these matters on the list :-) more next week Bye for now
Justine Chew
01:45:41
Agreed @Javier, even if I was forced to join the call late. Bye all.
John Rodriguez
01:45:41
Thanks Anna Beth!
julie.hedlund
01:45:42
Thanks all!
Colin O'Brien
01:45:43
Very good call nice job Annebeth. Bye all
Nkem Nweke
01:45:45
@All, good bye
Jaap Akkerhuis
01:45:46
bye
Annebeth Lange
01:45:48
Bye, bye
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:45:50
Mange takk!