
41:43
Hi everyone

41:45
hello to all

42:32
Hi everyone

48:22
Document available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rsyxCEBd6ax3Rb_w1kms_E9n29XL1_lw3Yp9XQ4TeCY/edit#

48:36
Thanks @Steve

52:15
no comments

52:20
no hands

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?

56:01
E.g. Brand applicant = .marseille, second applicant: CIty of Marseille

58:57
@Martin, you mean way of existing private resolution of contention sets? Or an auction as mechanism of last resort?

59:08
*by way

59:42
Command of English!

59:48
great wording

01:00:16
So, the question for NTIA will be if there have a new suggestion for solution?

01:00:55
Subject to any changes to WG deliberation on auctions, charge requests etc

01:01:25
Thanx @Justine

01:01:47
*change requests

01:02:04
apologies for typos!

01:02:10
no prob

01:03:39
And I of course meant INTA, not NTIA

01:04:03
Welcome to all those that have kept on joining.

01:04:06
Hello all - apologies for coming in late...

01:04:17
Bienvenido Jorge

01:04:32
gracias!

01:04:33
Hi Jorge

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.

01:06:07
@Justine, noted.

01:07:59
Is "INTA" the same as "NTIA" or are these two different entities?

01:08:15
+1 for parking lot per @Martin's suggestion

01:08:15
@Martin, good idea

01:08:19
what idea is being referred to?

01:09:09
@Jorge, Katrin's question was what happens if a brand and a city authority applies for a city name string.

01:09:34
what were the rules in 2012?

01:10:12
contention resolution mechanisms like auction as the mechanism of last resort

01:10:26
No priority of either I believe, just the normal contention resolution mechanisms

01:10:54
No priority FOR either I believe, just the normal contention resolution mechanisms

01:10:55
if the brand and city woudl not be able to agree, the last step woudl be an auction

01:10:56
ok - then there is Need for a conversation...

01:11:07
@Jorge, so the question is if there should be any changes to this or not

01:11:23
@Annebeth - exactly

01:12:03
INTA: International Trademark Assoc. '

01:12:07
@Jorge, yes, hence put onto parking lot.

01:12:43
@Javier, INTA != NTIA

01:13:10
@Martin, exactly. Relevant for other geonames further down the hierarchy

01:14:54
Thanks Steve. I think this only applies to two geo applications, not one brand and one geo applicant.

01:15:41
but the "intended use" only applies to"city names"

01:15:51
And it boils down to whether a string is CONSIDERED as a geoname string

01:16:19
@Steve, can you put in the chat what you just said please?

01:16:52
@Justine, sure

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.

01:18:02
@Steve, thanks!

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.

01:18:58
@Justine, that doesn’t necessarily need to be two…I should have said two or more.

01:19:25
Yes, understood. Contention set implies two or more.

01:20:55
Yes. @Jorge. You got it.

01:21:39
@Exaactly, Jorge, it could be a very interesting discussion to find better solutions both for city names and non-AGB terms

01:21:51
A good topic for Marrakech

01:22:49
@Jorge, any chance of some breakfast for WT5 members - now feeling very hungry!

01:23:40
Ha!!

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!

01:27:25
I said that there is no single standard for tranliteration

01:27:29
A critical issue indeed.

01:31:05
I completely forgot about the timer! Sorry Jorge, you’re the first on the timer.

01:35:53
@Jorge - maybe you have examples of geo names where this would apply?

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.

01:39:22
@Justine, this is a relevant comment

01:39:44
go on pls

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?

01:47:45
I’m not aware of any language protection mechanisms for identifier

01:47:48
Interesting @Sophie

01:50:05
Nice articulation of this complex issue, Annebeth

01:50:55
+1 Annebeth, I would express my personal on the standing to file objections in the respect also.

01:51:13
*in THIS respect also.

01:51:58
*I I would express my personal CONCERN on the standing to file objections in THIS respect also.

01:53:52
hand by Steve

01:55:29
the advisory panel would help and give certainty to applicants - based on the policy, and the Research done by ICANN

01:55:42
I'm afraid I got thrown out of the room for about 5 mins

01:56:26
Wikipedia is quite useful...

01:57:21
Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_official_languages_by_country_and_territory

01:58:08
See also: www.ethnologue.com

01:58:40
+1 Javier

01:58:50
@staff: Could you please add the compromise proposal from the geoTLD as a comment to the section?

01:59:39
@Katrin, are you referring to the suggestion about the transliterations? Or something else?

01:59:43
+1 agree it would be useful to add in the compromise Katrin proposed

01:59:44
Thx @Martin

02:00:36
@Steve: Transliterations into ASCII and conversion to DNS labels

02:00:50
but the current rule isnt restrictive, its the opposite...

02:01:00
Thanks for confirming @Katrin

02:01:01
will do

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

02:01:05
thx

02:01:36
thanks @jorge.

02:02:33
@Jorge - but that would still ignore any potential applicants deterred by what they perceived to be restrictive rules

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.

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

02:08:02
@Martin: reserach could have tried to cover such potentially deterred applicants

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.

02:08:35
Steve - can you repeat link to this doc -

02:08:41
and it is at least telling that we have never heard about such a case

02:09:26
@item 11 I think is what I want to comment on

02:09:45
btw: documents should have a date a version number and be archived in a stable URL

02:09:46
@David, what Olga just said. We are updating the document on a weekly basis and sending with the agenda.

02:10:04
thks

02:10:11
i had closed it and agenda

02:10:39
agree w Jorge on that

02:10:59
just standard document management :-)

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...

02:11:28
Thanks Olga and all

02:11:31
can we rename it the Orange Room?

02:11:35
See, it’s hard to pronounce!

02:11:39
Ciao to all

02:11:45
Thank you all, very good discussions

02:11:46
Thanks, Olga!

02:11:48
bye & thanks

02:11:50
bye all

02:11:52
bye al!

02:11:55
Thanks everyone... Bye for now safe travels for those who are doing so...

02:11:56
bye all

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.