Logo

Terri Agnew's Personal Meeting Room
Vrikson
27:15
Hello
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
30:37
It's a shame, but I think it's right there is no clear consensus to change
Susan Payne
30:46
what are we ticking for - which scenario
Justine Chew
30:51
no clear way forward
Katrin Ohlmer
31:28
which ticks?
Heather Forrest
31:46
+1 Julie - thanks
Jorge Cancio
31:52
+1 Nick
Justine Chew
31:58
tick for a negative answer?
Heather Forrest
32:43
I have one further clarifying question
Katrin Ohlmer
32:47
+1 Nick, really disappointing
julie.hedlund
32:49
Affirm no agreement on a path forward. Hands to discuss further.
Chris Casavale
33:05
No clear way forward
Heather Forrest
33:06
My hand is up, as is Christopher's
Susan Payne
33:35
agree really disappointing because I thought we had reached general agreement 2 calls ago but last call we seemed to be at impasse
Heather Forrest
34:11
Me too - I'm very confused. The last call that Martin chaired I thought we had agreement on languages for country names?
Susan Payne
34:12
this is a PDP Christopher
Griffin Barnett
35:09
Christopher - GNSO operating procedures dictate that status quo remains if a PDP does not displace it with something new
Sophie Hey
35:20
I thought there was potential to reach agreement on languages which is why I put forward the proposal on slides 9 and 10
Heather Forrest
35:29
+1 Sophie
Heather Forrest
36:02
I believe it's most unfair to suggest that anyone is getting what they want out of WT5 or frankly the 2012 AGB
Heather Forrest
37:20
Sorry - that's unfortunate
Heather Forrest
37:26
Thanks for clarifying.
Susan Payne
37:50
@Sophie, I agree and I support your proposal, but it doesn't seem as though there has been support since you circulated it - although to be hoinest there hasn't been much response generally onthis topic
christopher wilkinson
39:43
@Griffin Barnett - disagree with GNSO operating procedures on this point. Everything changed with the creation of the Community following the transition.
Justine Chew
39:45
Can we please move on?
Susan Payne
40:09
re poison pill, I'm certainly not trying to rely on poison pill and I don' tthink others are either - there have been plenty of attempts to compromise proposed from different sides
jaap akkerhuis
44:56
which box
Justine Chew
45:23
@Martin, are you reversing your question now?
julie.hedlund
45:24
Green check mark
jaap akkerhuis
45:38
Si say you tick yes and nit just “a box”
jaap akkerhuis
45:46
Close this of
Infinix X510
46:14
Yes
jaap akkerhuis
46:54
There are multiple boxes in the panel saying “a box” is not helping
Infinix X510
48:18
Nkem Nweke
Jorge Cancio
48:24
there is a new proposal, coming out from discussions onlist
Unknown Speaker
00:48:32 Jorge Cancio :• Terms beyond the 2012 AGB rules with geographic meaning shall be subject to a contact obligation with the relevant public authorities, in order to put them on notice.• For the application of the abovementioned rule only the following terms will be considered as being “terms with geographic meaning”:o Adjectival forms of country names (country names to be identified from the ISO 3166-1 list) and/or other terms with geographic meaning, as notified by GAC Members states or other UN Member states to the ICANN Organization within a deadline of 12 months following the adoption of this proposal;o Interested countries would provide relevant contact details with said notification;• Applicants for such a term will then be under an obligation to contact the relevant country. That contact notification must happen, at the latest, in the period between applications closing and reveal day, but an applicant may choose to notify earlier than this.
Justine Chew
48:51
Thank you @Jorge.
julie.hedlund
49:06
@Jorge: We have slides for Susan’s and your proposals.
Susan Payne
50:13
Thanks Julie!
Katrin Ohlmer
50:48
just for clarification: This proposal and Jorge's proposal onyl refer to countries (not regions, cities), correct?
Paul McGrady
51:05
@Katrin - correct.
Jorge Cancio
51:06
no
Jorge Cancio
51:10
not mine
Heather Forrest
53:58
I support the first point (adjectival forms), as this could prevent user confusion.
Alexander Schubert
55:06
I agree with Susan: "All Languages" is a gross overprotection and applicants can't "handle" it in a subjective way.
Katrin Ohlmer
55:12
Is there a list of adjectival forms of countries available?
Paul McGrady
55:20
+1 Susan. Any'all geographic terms is too far. Adjectival forms of country-name-only might be acceotable, depending on the other details/process. What is a "modicum"? How would the Geo Panel possibly know what steps the applicant took (especially given all of the languages involved). I think your narrow approach is a good way forward. Jorge's is, unfortunately, too broad.
Justine Chew
56:16
@Susan, would you consider country names and capital city names given that these are more "concrete"?
Paul McGrady
56:48
Londonish?
Justine Chew
56:54
Parisien
Heather Forrest
57:05
@Susan - you can reply if you reply in a Londonish way
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
57:08
if a "adjectival" string is applied, couldn't such a string be objected to, either on community or public interest grounds ?
Katrin Ohlmer
57:18
Is there a list of adjectival forms of countries and capital cities available?
Paul McGrady
57:49
New Yorker would be a nound, not an adjective
Heather Forrest
57:53
@Katrin - can we rely on adjective forms of the established standards ISO3166-1 and -2?
Paul McGrady
57:58
Londoner is a nound
Susan Payne
58:04
Londonish/er,no I don'tthink so
Paul McGrady
58:13
Capital city names too far - way too many restructed terms
Susan Payne
58:17
+1 to Paul
Matthew Johnson
58:24
+1 Susan and Paul
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
58:27
if a "adjectival" string is applied, couldn't such a string be objected to, either on community or public interest grounds by governments ?
Katrin Ohlmer
58:37
@Heather - looks like there is some way for interpretation what the adjective is
Jorge Cancio
59:19
may I introduce the variant?
Susan Payne
59:28
To be clear this is only the requirement for notification, in order to assist the authority's montioring and decision whether to object
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
59:29
Scottish, Irish?
Paul McGrady
59:53
@Susan - correct. This would be a notice only and should not convey any additional rights to object
julie.hedlund
01:00:02
@Jorge: Your proposal is up on the slide.
Paul McGrady
01:00:46
The adjectival form of New York is "gritty". :) Chicago-4-ever.
Paul McGrady
01:02:57
@Jorge, likewise, Susan's proposal is a long way from the AGB guidebook that doesn't require anything like this. I think Susan's position is a good compromise position.
Robin Gross
01:03:42
Restricting words “with geographic meaning” is just too broad. It unfairly subjugates other legitimate interests to GAC. Not going to fly.
Heather Forrest
01:05:24
Surely we can come to agreement on national adjectives at least, even if not all the others?
Heather Forrest
01:05:30
Isn't this conpromise?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:05:50
Time for compromise is indeed now
Sophie Hey
01:07:09
+1 Robin
Katrin Ohlmer
01:07:33
We might be able to support the proposal from Jorge, but I'll have to consult with the geoTLD group as this only had been presented today.
Annebeth Lange
01:07:46
+1 Cheryl
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:07:47
Jorge’s proposal has the merit of recognising that one size does not fit all. Not all governments care about geo names within their borders, but some do and even have legal basis.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:08:04
+1 Yrjo
Paul McGrady
01:08:21
Susan's proposal for a notice process for the adjectival forms of national name is a reasonable compromise. An "all or nothing" approach from the "restrict geographic terms" crowd would be really disaapointing, since there is no stomach for the extrenmely broad category of affected terms that Jorge is suggesting.
Sophie Hey
01:08:57
+1 Paul
Matthew Johnson
01:09:31
+1 Paul
Susan Payne
01:10:11
I don'tthink I can support the extension Jorge is proposing, but I have not been able to consider it in detail. I'm concerned that this is too wide, the terms are being self-identified rather than being an "independent" list
Jorge Cancio
01:10:15
@Paul: it means allowing GAC/UN members 12 months to add geonames where a contact is required
Jorge Cancio
01:10:46
no non-objection requirement!
Justine Chew
01:11:27
I agree with @Jorge. We're talking about notice, not letter of support or non-objection.
Jorge Cancio
01:13:58
thx Alexander
Paul McGrady
01:15:05
@Martin - can you make it clear what we are to object to?
Paul McGrady
01:15:12
Susans or Jorege's?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
01:15:23
Wouldn't adjectival forms (esp those with just "ian" or "er" added to a country name) of country names fall under the AGB guidebook rules regarding permutation or transposition of any of the names
Alexander Schubert
01:15:31
Suggestion in written: Governments supply a list of (geo) strings they want to be notified about - ICANN would facilitate the notification process the minute after the application window is closed. No obligations for applicants. The list would be publically available.
Paul McGrady
01:15:44
Thanks. Strong support for Susan. Many others expressed their support for Susan's in chat.
Jorge Cancio
01:15:53
@Paul: it's better if we improve the proposals, not object to them ;P
Sophie Hey
01:16:23
Support Susan's proposal
Katrin Ohlmer
01:16:29
I'll have to consult with the geoTLD before voicing a position.
Chris Casavale
01:16:34
Support for Susan's proposal
Paul McGrady
01:16:37
@Jorge - thanks for your note. Martin asked if there was objection, not me. I was just doing my best to understand the question. :)
Matthew Johnson
01:16:39
Support Susans' proposal
Justine Chew
01:16:41
I personally prefer @jorge's proposal
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:16:54
I'm ok with both
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:17:16
Support Susan’s proposal
Heather Forrest
01:17:28
I support Susan's proposal
Infinix X510
01:17:58
@Jorge's proposal +1
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
01:18:34
Support Susan's proposal
Robin Gross
01:19:27
the proposal to restrict terms including “and / or terms with geo meaning” has no bounds and is just too broad of a catch-all restricting people’s expression.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:19:43
We should make sure to add certainty for applicants with a concrete list of strings.
Jorge Cancio
01:20:06
@Robin: there is no restriction at all - just a contact provision
Matthew Johnson
01:20:12
Agree with Robin
Yrjo Lansipuro
01:20:19
I support Jorge’s proposal
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:20:20
+1 Katrin that's my concern
Robin Gross
01:21:15
Jorge, the contact leads to the restriction.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:21:20
@Nick: Same here .....
Susan Payne
01:21:26
@Nick WS - good points, I had not thought of all eventualities. But since I have strongly opposed alllanguages generally I certainly was not proposing it here. I would actually consider that only the official languages of the country are relevant here
Susan Payne
01:21:44
for the adjectival form
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:22:02
@Susan I think that makes total sense in this context
Sonigitu Ekpe
01:22:57
I think the string shall not be objected to by government or public if properly communicated.
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:23:11
@Jorge, what happens as a consequence of the notification?
Justine Chew
01:23:44
@Nick, I think that would be up to party being notified.
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:24:15
@Jorge - Thanks for the clarification
Paul McGrady
01:24:20
Agree with Robin. Susan's proposal is narrow and meant as a compromise position. Jorge's two proposals are wide open and, in my opinion, go way too far,
Robin Gross
01:24:53
there are simply no boundaries on what can be considered “terms with geo meaning”. Why not try to bound the terms that so it isn’t everything under the sun?
Paul McGrady
01:25:02
@Jorge, if nothing happens, why would we want applicants to do it?
Paul McGrady
01:25:13
+1 Robin
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:25:15
@Robin - THat is why I asked what I did
Heather Forrest
01:25:16
Again, can't we at least compromise on national names?
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:25:21
Jorge
Heather Forrest
01:25:32
Without pushing the boat out to such amorphous concepts?
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:25:32
Jorge's proposal states it must be protected by law
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:25:37
before it gets on the list
Susan Payne
01:25:46
@Robin yes, that was what I was trying to do by keeping it narrow and focussed to the adjectival forms of the country names
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:25:59
I am not in favor or against any of the proposals, just trying to understand them
Justine Chew
01:26:07
@Paul, "nothing" is not the right word. It would be up to the party being notified to take further action, if they wished.
Heather Forrest
01:26:16
@Jeff - how do we define "terms with geographic meaning" when national laws may not contain such a definition, or indeed may define this term differently if they do?
Katrin Ohlmer
01:26:22
@Robin: I suggested to bound the terms to a list of the app. 4.000 biggest cities. That has been a very concrete and limited proposal.
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
01:26:37
The EU seems to have a list of adjectival forms for country names http://publications.europa.eu/code/en/en-5000500.htm
Justine Chew
01:27:21
+1 Alexander
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:27:28
@Heather - that is a question that I would like to hear Jorge's response on.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:27:34
+1 Alex
julie.hedlund
01:28:48
Apologies all, I should have been applying the timer. I’ve brought it up, although responses have been brief.
Justine Chew
01:29:33
@Jorge, I'd love to see names of places on World Heritage List and the likes on the list.
Paul McGrady
01:29:37
@Alexander - likewise, applicant's don't have the manpower or resources to guess what the 200+ countries might get cranky about in all the relevant languages. There is no stomach to introduce the non-predictability of requiring applicants to divine what countries around the world are thinking on any given day.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:30:18
@Paul: Google Maps is your friend ;-)
Paul McGrady
01:30:29
@justine - perhaps, but that is not what Jorge said.
Greg Shatan
01:31:32
Katrin, Claiming the entire map is a problem....
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:31:49
sorry old hand!
Katrin Ohlmer
01:32:52
@Paul: Applicants can easily query Google Maps to determine whether a name is a geo name - so it is less about asking applicants for many ressources.
Jorge Cancio
01:33:02
may I suggest that we discuss, refine, confine my variant during the next week?
Paul McGrady
01:33:49
@Katrin, I just searched "Irish" in Google Maps. It showed me where all the Irish pubs are here in Falun, Sweden, but no indication of what the Irish Taoiseach may be thinking about gTLDs. :)
Susan Payne
01:34:22
@Katrin can you clarify, I thought your smily face meant you were joking about Google maps, but nw I am notmso sure?
Dev Anand Teelucksingh
01:34:23
World Bank also has a adjectival forms for countries https://siteresources.worldbank.org/TRANSLATIONSERVICESEXT/Resources/CountryNamesandAdjectives.doc
Robin Gross
01:34:39
There is a region in California called “The Delta”. I’m not sure how Google maps solves this question.
Matthew Johnson
01:34:46
@Katrin - I'm not sure Google is the best determinant or decider of geographic terms.
Susan Payne
01:35:02
you cannot expect to search google maps identify a list of terms across the world and then go and contact them all?
Katrin Ohlmer
01:35:04
@Paul: The proposal is not about adjectives, but geo names.
Paul McGrady
01:35:51
@Robin, I put Delta into Google Maps and the first thing that came up was a point of interest: Delta Air Lines! :)
Robin Gross
01:36:04
LOL
Katrin Ohlmer
01:36:20
@Susan: My smiley referred to naming Google maps as a friend.
Greg Shatan
01:37:16
I suppose the various trademark databases can also be “friends.”
Susan Payne
01:37:37
@Katrin it just goes to show how we can misunderstand each other sometimes!
Greg Shatan
01:39:29
“National laws” will not be applicable law for an applicant that is not resident in that country,
Justine Chew
01:40:16
Can staff move the slide up please?
Robin Gross
01:40:30
Good point, Greg. Laws do not apply in an extra-territory fashion.
Susan Payne
01:41:47
+1 Paul
Susan Payne
01:42:18
No justification for giving priority to the "geo" over community,brand or other apps
Robin Gross
01:42:25
+1 Paul
Katrin Ohlmer
01:42:33
@Paul: Would you support the proposal if we were to incorporate communities?
Matthew Johnson
01:42:33
+1 Paul
Matthew Johnson
01:45:19
@Christopher - Understood, however again ICANN can't be the interpreter of national laws or enforce them.
julie.hedlund
01:45:23
Timer is as small as I can make it unfortunately.
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:45:26
@christopher if they miss the 12 months then I think they don't get protection for subsequently legislated new names to be notified
Jim Prendergast
01:45:51
Problem with dicussing priorititization within the group is that there are similar dicussions going on in the plenary and these need to be synched up
Robin Gross
01:46:34
A critical component of national sovereignty means that other countries don’t apply in your country. ICANN should not try to change this linchpin of national sovereignty.
Paul McGrady
01:46:59
@Katrin, I never say no before reading what anyone would like to propose, but providing for special rights for the Geo Term Domain Industry by tacking them on to the Community Application process would not be my first choice. If a Geo Term domain name seller wants to get supprt from a community and apply that way, there is nothnig stopping them. But leapfrogging Community Applications is a nonstarter.
Katrin Ohlmer
01:48:36
The intend is for identical cities or regions - like the cities named .dublin and .dublin. It's not about putting a city and a region in the same bucket.
Paul McGrady
01:49:14
As the proposal is written, if there was a community application for .Toledo for University of Toledo Alumni and another applicant just wanted to sell .toledo second level domain names to whomever, this proposal would allow the second application to trump the community based application. Can't support that.
Greg Shatan
01:51:37
+1 Jeff. Very well said. I don’t think the case has been made. It’s been taken more on faith or on broad concepts like “sovereignty.”]
Katrin Ohlmer
01:52:39
@Martin - thanks, will do so.
christopher wilkinson
01:53:05
@ Jeff - Reverse there burden of proof. Very many people only recognise the priority for the existence of their geographic name. Why should any other use have a propriety?
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:53:08
The point was that it is one thing to talk about protection of geonames, but it is a whole other thing to talk about priority. I am just not clear as to why should this ICANN community value the the use of strings as geo identifiers over all other uses of a string
Jeff Neuman (Com Laude Group)
01:53:50
Why is it in the public interest to place a greater value on geo names vs other uses of names?
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
01:54:02
Thanks everyone GREAT discussion today.... Bye for now...
Paul McGrady
01:54:08
Thanks all! Good call today. Robust and respectful!
Katrin Ohlmer
01:54:17
Thank, Martin.
Heather Forrest
01:54:18
Bye all -thanks Martin - great work facilitating
Nick Wenban-Smith, Nominet
01:54:20
Ciao!
jaap akkerhuis
01:54:20
bye
Robin Gross
01:54:22
thanks all!
Annebeth Lange
01:54:22
Bye