Meetings 2012

GeoTLDs meeting at ICANN meeting in Toronto

GeoTLDs Meeting @ ICANN Toronto

15.10.2012 from 03:00 pm to 05:00 pm in room Dockside 5

 Admin

  • Welcome & Introduction (40 participants)
    • Dirk Krischenowski, Johannes Lenz-Hawliczek, Katrin Ohlmer (.BERLIN)
    • Elaine Pruis (.MIAMI, .BUDAPEST, .ROME, .BAYERN, .NRW, .LONDON)
    • Ronald Schwärzler (.WIEN, .TIROL)
    • Oliver Sueme (.HAMBURG)
    • Peter Vergote, Philip Du Bois, Lut Goedhuys (.BRUSSELS. VLANDEREN)
    • Kevin Saimon (.OSAKA, .KYOTO)
    • Neil Dundas, Louis (.AFRICA, .CAPETOWN, .DURBAN, .JOBURG)
    • Donna Austin (.MELBOURNE, .SYDNEY)
    • Rubens Kuhl (.RIO)
    • Paul Molenaar, Hubert Welleman (.AMSTERDAM)
    • Amadeu Abril i Abril, Werner Staub (.MADRID, .SWISS, .SCOT, .GAL, .EUS, …)
    • Richard Wein (nic.at, RSP for 5 GeoTLDs)
    • Nacho Amadoz, Jordi Ipparaguire, Mr. Ribera (.BCN, .BARCELONA, .CAT)
    • Mohammed I. Al Zarooni (.DUBAI, .ABUDHABI incl. IDN, .ARAB incl. IDN)
    • Alex Schubert (prospective GeoTLD applicant)
    • Norman Frontier, André Morrow, (.QUEBEC)
    • Sergey Gorbunov (.MOSCOW incl. IDN)
    • Henri de Jong (.FRL)
    • Stephanie Lacroix, Jean-Paul Chiron (.AQUITAINE)
    • Fabien Detrimeux, Matthieu Credou (.PARIS)
    • Edmon Chung, Yannis Li (.GUANDONG, .GUANZONG)
    • Tom Lowenhaupt (.NYC)
    • Tony Kirsch (ARIServices)
    • Jean-Christophe Vignes (Caprioli & Associés)
    • Louis Houle (ISOC Quebec)
  • Members of the GeoTLDs group should be
    • Applicants which marked themselves as “GEO” in their ICANN application
    • Parties from other geographical name applications (.CORSICA, .RUHR, …)
    • Engaged parties (e.g. city reps, consultants) and interested parties
  • Today 42 participants are on list. Aim is to get more GeoTLDs related parties signing up the mailing list. Dirk will send list around for a roster draft which he consolidates.
  • Nearly half of the participants are also observer in RySG and/or NTAG.
  • No membership fee for the time being should apply.
  • Discussion on the scope of this group:
    • Edmon: Scope, how shall be the future position the group – become group under GAC, GNSO, others?
    • Peter: Linked with regional governments
    • Elaine: Would be good to become observer, but then we would not be able to vote anymore.
    • Amadeu: Governmental applicants will not want to let their suppliers speak on their behalf once the group has a formal status.
    • Amsterdam: Internal focus, not really external focus.
  • Voting
    • We are not an offical group.
    • Voting by majority, with mentioning minority.
  • Directory with a summary of the individual application (Use for rationale / reasoning to stakeholders, easier for all to understand the other applications). Dirk will send around a draft.
    • Survey Draft via Google Survey (Peter/ Katrin)
  • Discussion about predictability of the gTLD approval process vs. Geo prioritization

Agenda

  • How can we lobby for a IDN-like prioritization of GeoTLDs in the DRAW model
    • .BERLIN has been working a long time on this and thanks all parties signing the batching paper.
    • DRAW proposal makes it necessary to bring ICANN to a final decision.
    • Statement in GAC session yesterday so far supported by AR, DE, CH, GB, BR.
    • Rationale: ICANN received 66 applications from all ICANN regions that declared themselves to be GeoTLDs. Each of these has to have the support or non-objection of the respective governments or public authorities; some have even been filed by public authorities themselves. The requirement for government support or non-objection is a core element of the GAC Principles Regarding New gTLDs issued in March, 2007. These public policy principles were introduced to safeguard the global public interest. Principle 2.2 says: “ICANN should avoid country, territory or place names, and country, territory or regional language or people descriptions, unless in agreement with relevant governments or public authorities. With this background it is convincing that the GeoTLD applications fulfil the requirements set by ICANN to give a priority to certain categories of TLDs: to promote DNS diversity, make the Internet more accessible, increase avenues of participation and serve the public interest.
    • Elaine: Supports the GeoTLDS prioritization. Expects others to argument against this proposal, for instance that then communities will ask for prioritization, too. Advantage of prioritzation is minor (only up to 3 months)
    • Amadeu: Even if communities would be added, we just have two more weeks (GeoTLDs) more waiting time for all not prioritized gTLDs.
    • Werner: GeoTLDs have local support.
    • Ruben: Advantage of prioritzation is much larger (3-18 months).
    • Discussion about ICANN Bylaws – Public Interest.
    • Edmon: Round-Robin proposal with ICANN region model could be a suggestion.
    • Elaine: in Update Session clearly said, no way.
    • Amadeu: Only way to success is GAC.
    • Ronald: Will continue to speak with GAC.
    • Alex Schubert: Think about second round.
    • Oliver Sueme: Talk to ICANN Board, Amadeu: This does not help.
    • Russia / Muhammed: Moskau applied for IDN and non-IDN TLD. If DRAW proposal stays like this, the IDN would be approved months ahead of the Latin script version.
    • Nacho / Amadeu / Matieu / Friesland / Africa / Brussels / Dirk: Working Group to arrange a meeting with GAC.
    • Amadeu: Contractual Issues to be solved (not accepting the standard contract), GeoTLDs do not want to leave the train.
  • Exchange of best practice in work with the local government (relationship, contracts, registration policies)
    • Directory could help to bring transparency in the GeoTLD application cloud
    • Inform local governments about the GeoTLD group?
    • Meeting between Toronto and Beijing?
      • Yes, group supports, potentially in regional sub-groups
    • Who has no support letter? Who is no Geo? 3 applicants less?
      • Dirk: Missing support letters.
      • Amadeu: Who signed letter – could have been the wrong ones and not the relevant authority or the wrong person.
  • Project specific questions (planning, timing, budget, marketing)
    • Should we have a common communication (communication to GACs and ICANN Board, timeline, etc.)? Should we draft something here in Toronto?
    • Share business models, implementation plans, namespace mandate, governance issues, …
    • Tom Lowenhaupt will share presentation about namespace mandate.
  • How to release 2 Character Domain Names
    • Process unclear.
    • Timing is essential.
    • We have to ask our GAC.
    • Tony: Have to ask for release and speak with GAC asap.
    • Ronald: Works on draft list for two characters which are interesting for all GeoTLDs.
  • Trademark Clearing House / Uniform Rapid Suspension System
    • There are a number of different Sunrise models: before, parallel, and after TMCH.
    • Most of GeoTLD applicants will have local sunrise and need to use some sort of local trademarks.
    • Find convergence how to setup common way.
    • Working Group: Werner / Sergej.
  • Whois Verification and Data Retention
    • Members may talk about the individual national requirements. Common proposal?
    • Not discussed.
  • Other Business
    • GeoTLDs website?

geotld-toronto-6 geotld-toronto-5 geotld-toronto-4 geotld-toronto-3 geotld-toronto-2 geotld-toronto-1