Cheryl Langdon-Orr (PDP Co Chair)
41:43
Hi everyone
Javier Rúa-Jovet
41:45
hello to all
Annebeth Lange
42:32
Hi everyone
Steve Chan
48:22
Document available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rsyxCEBd6ax3Rb_w1kms_E9n29XL1_lw3Yp9XQ4TeCY/edit#
Javier Rúa-Jovet
48:36
Thanks @Steve
Javier Rúa-Jovet
52:15
no comments
Javier Rúa-Jovet
52:20
no hands
Katrin Ohlmer
54:09
Can we let clarify how the INTA proposal should work in case there is a second applicant for the name being the city itself?
Katrin Ohlmer
56:01
E.g. Brand applicant = .marseille, second applicant: CIty of Marseille
Justine Chew
58:57
@Martin, you mean way of existing private resolution of contention sets? Or an auction as mechanism of last resort?
Justine Chew
59:08
*by way
Javier Rúa-Jovet
59:42
Command of English!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
59:48
great wording
Annebeth Lange
01:00:16
So, the question for NTIA will be if there have a new suggestion for solution?
Justine Chew
01:00:55
Subject to any changes to WG deliberation on auctions, charge requests etc
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:01:25
Thanx @Justine
Justine Chew
01:01:47
*change requests
Justine Chew
01:02:04
apologies for typos!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:02:10
no prob
Annebeth Lange
01:03:39
And I of course meant INTA, not NTIA
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:04:03
Welcome to all those that have kept on joining.
Jorge Cancio
01:04:06
Hello all - apologies for coming in late...
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:04:17
Bienvenido Jorge
Jorge Cancio
01:04:32
gracias!
Annebeth Lange
01:04:33
Hi Jorge
Justine Chew
01:05:12
With regards to the portion on "Reliance on curative mechanism" I would express a personal concern on the standing to file objections.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:06:07
@Justine, noted.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:07:59
Is "INTA" the same as "NTIA" or are these two different entities?
Justine Chew
01:08:15
+1 for parking lot per @Martin's suggestion
Annebeth Lange
01:08:15
@Martin, good idea
Jorge Cancio
01:08:19
what idea is being referred to?
Justine Chew
01:09:09
@Jorge, Katrin's question was what happens if a brand and a city authority applies for a city name string.
Jorge Cancio
01:09:34
what were the rules in 2012?
Katrin Ohlmer
01:10:12
contention resolution mechanisms like auction as the mechanism of last resort
Justine Chew
01:10:26
No priority of either I believe, just the normal contention resolution mechanisms
Justine Chew
01:10:54
No priority FOR either I believe, just the normal contention resolution mechanisms
Katrin Ohlmer
01:10:55
if the brand and city woudl not be able to agree, the last step woudl be an auction
Jorge Cancio
01:10:56
ok - then there is Need for a conversation...
Annebeth Lange
01:11:07
@Jorge, so the question is if there should be any changes to this or not
Katrin Ohlmer
01:11:23
@Annebeth - exactly
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:12:03
INTA: International Trademark Assoc. '
Justine Chew
01:12:07
@Jorge, yes, hence put onto parking lot.
Justine Chew
01:12:43
@Javier, INTA != NTIA
Annebeth Lange
01:13:10
@Martin, exactly. Relevant for other geonames further down the hierarchy
Katrin Ohlmer
01:14:54
Thanks Steve. I think this only applies to two geo applications, not one brand and one geo applicant.
Jorge Cancio
01:15:41
but the "intended use" only applies to"city names"
Justine Chew
01:15:51
And it boils down to whether a string is CONSIDERED as a geoname string
Justine Chew
01:16:19
@Steve, can you put in the chat what you just said please?
Steve Chan
01:16:52
@Justine, sure
Steve Chan
01:17:39
Here is the text from the AGB for TWO geographic names: An auction will not take place to resolve contention in the case where the contending applications are for geographic names (as defined in Module 2). In this case, the applications will be suspended pending resolution by the applicants.
Justine Chew
01:18:02
@Steve, thanks!
Steve Chan
01:18:16
If there is a contention set with say, a brand or a generic string and then also a geographic name, that would have been allowed to proceed to auction under the 2012 rounds.
Steve Chan
01:18:58
@Justine, that doesn’t necessarily need to be two…I should have said two or more.
Justine Chew
01:19:25
Yes, understood. Contention set implies two or more.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:20:55
Yes. @Jorge. You got it.
Annebeth Lange
01:21:39
@Exaactly, Jorge, it could be a very interesting discussion to find better solutions both for city names and non-AGB terms
Annebeth Lange
01:21:51
A good topic for Marrakech
martinsutton
01:22:49
@Jorge, any chance of some breakfast for WT5 members - now feeling very hungry!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:23:40
Ha!!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:24:40
Happy belated Father's Day to all, by the way. No breakfast for kids, if there are no dads to prepare it!
jaap
01:27:25
I said that there is no single standard for tranliteration
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:27:29
A critical issue indeed.
Steve Chan
01:31:05
I completely forgot about the timer! Sorry Jorge, you’re the first on the timer.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:35:53
@Jorge - maybe you have examples of geo names where this would apply?
Justine Chew
01:36:15
+1 Jorge. Plus if we are in support of the principle of broad accessibility to under-served communities, then their languages should matter.
Annebeth Lange
01:39:22
@Justine, this is a relevant comment
Jorge Cancio
01:39:44
go on pls
Sophie Hey
01:47:09
What if we require letters of support/non-objection in the languages that the government publishes official translations of laws in or the language(s) the government operates in?
jaap
01:47:45
I’m not aware of any language protection mechanisms for identifier
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:47:48
Interesting @Sophie
David McAuley
01:50:05
Nice articulation of this complex issue, Annebeth
Justine Chew
01:50:55
+1 Annebeth, I would express my personal on the standing to file objections in the respect also.
Justine Chew
01:51:13
*in THIS respect also.
Justine Chew
01:51:58
*I I would express my personal CONCERN on the standing to file objections in THIS respect also.
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:53:52
hand by Steve
Jorge Cancio
01:55:29
the advisory panel would help and give certainty to applicants - based on the policy, and the Research done by ICANN
Susan Payne
01:55:42
I'm afraid I got thrown out of the room for about 5 mins
Jorge Cancio
01:56:26
Wikipedia is quite useful...
Steve Chan
01:57:21
Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory
Annebeth Lange
01:58:08
See also: www.ethnologue.com
Jorge Cancio
01:58:40
+1 Javier
Katrin Ohlmer
01:58:50
@staff: Could you please add the compromise proposal from the geoTLD as a comment to the section?
Steve Chan
01:59:39
@Katrin, are you referring to the suggestion about the transliterations? Or something else?
Susan Payne
01:59:43
+1 agree it would be useful to add in the compromise Katrin proposed
Javier Rúa-Jovet
01:59:44
Thx @Martin
Katrin Ohlmer
02:00:36
@Steve: Transliterations into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels
Javier Rúa-Jovet
02:00:50
but the current rule isnt restrictive, its the opposite...
Steve Chan
02:01:00
Thanks for confirming @Katrin
Steve Chan
02:01:01
will do
Jorge Cancio
02:01:04
there could be evidence from the GeoNames Panel - and Research on Problems could have been done - I raised this many months ago
Katrin Ohlmer
02:01:05
thx
Javier Rúa-Jovet
02:01:36
thanks @jorge.
martinsutton
02:02:33
@Jorge - but that would still ignore any potential applicants deterred by what they perceived to be restrictive rules
Javier Rúa-Jovet
02:06:02
Thinking out loud on languages (and I know my place is not to make suggestions) ; if WT were to settle for a status quo type solution (all lanuages), I wonder if one way forward might include excluding "fictional" or "made up" languages. And I'm not kidding here.
Susan Payne
02:07:32
I do have a comment on the proposal from USG regarding the use requirement. I will send an email as follow up. I missed the start of the call
Jorge Cancio
02:08:02
@Martin: reserach could have tried to cover such potentially deterred applicants
Steve Chan
02:08:26
@All, it’s anticipated that this document currently being displayed would be serve as the basis for some discussions during session 1.
David McAuley
02:08:35
Steve - can you repeat link to this doc -
Jorge Cancio
02:08:41
and it is at least telling that we have never heard about such a case
Susan Payne
02:09:26
@item 11 I think is what I want to comment on
Jorge Cancio
02:09:45
btw: documents should have a date a version number and be archived in a stable URL
Steve Chan
02:09:46
@David, what Olga just said. We are updating the document on a weekly basis and sending with the agenda.
David McAuley
02:10:04
thks
David McAuley
02:10:11
i had closed it and agenda
David McAuley
02:10:39
agree w Jorge on that
Jorge Cancio
02:10:59
just standard document management :-)
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (PDP Co Chair)
02:11:01
just confirmomg all the Monday sessions for WT5 as well as the others in the afternoonfor the full WG are in rm Orangeraie...
David McAuley
02:11:28
Thanks Olga and all
martinsutton
02:11:31
can we rename it the Orange Room?
Steve Chan
02:11:35
See, it’s hard to pronounce!
Javier Rúa-Jovet
02:11:39
Ciao to all
Annebeth Lange
02:11:45
Thank you all, very good discussions
Katrin Ohlmer
02:11:46
Thanks, Olga!
avri doria
02:11:48
bye & thanks
jaap
02:11:50
bye all
Jorge Cancio
02:11:52
bye al!
Cheryl Langdon-Orr (PDP Co Chair)
02:11:55
Thanks everyone... Bye for now safe travels for those who are doing so...
Gnanajeyaraman Rajaram
02:11:56
bye all
Justine Chew
02:11:58
Thanks all
Zoom would like to update your account settings. When joining a meeting or webinar by entering a meeting ID, participants will be required to enter a password. Participants joining using a meeting invite link will not be required to enter a password. Learn More
This change will be effective on . If approved or declined, the change will take effect immediately.