Governments (like all entrenched interests) want special rights to new generic top-level domains. The Cairo meeting will be an important meeting. See below. Robin Begin forwarded message: > From: Kurt Pritz <[log in to unmask]> > Date: October 2, 2008 6:06:55 PM PDT > To: Council GNSO <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: [council] Council meeting: New gTLD Update > > Council Members: > > Thank you for the opportunity on last week's Council call to > provide information regarding the current state of implementation > planning for the GNSO's new gTLD policy recommendations. I thought > I would take few minutes of your time to reiterate some of the > points made during our discussion and indicate possible paths for > Council and community discussion. > > As you may recall, one of the items described during the Council > call was a recent discussion with the GAC to obtain a better > understanding of the issues raised in their policy advice to the > ICANN Board: "GAC Principles Regarding New gTLDs." In that meeting > (and earlier ones in Delhi and Paris), GAC members provided some > detail as to the expectations of > governments and the possible protections to be afforded to > geographical names in the new gTLD application and evaluation process. > > As a result of those consultations, ICANN will post two documents. > The first will be a letter from Paul Twomey to GAC Chair Janis > Karklins that: (1) repeats back the meeting discussion points in > order to ensure understanding; (2) provides a potential model for > going ahead with some of the protections the government > representatives are requesting; and (3) describes areas where > requested protections would be problematic to implement or enforce. > The second document, for public comment, review and modification, > is the upcoming draft of the new gTLD "RFP" - the guidebook that > will be provided to potential applicants. The RFP will also > describe some of those potential protections. > > Those documents are being presented for public discussion and do > not represent a final implementation model. > > The documents are intended to highlight discrepancies between the > report of the GNSO Reserved Names working group and the GAC advice > to the Board by describing potential implementation details. I.e., > creating potential operational processes brings to light more > clearly issues for implementation discussion. They will inform a > discussion in Cairo where there will be opportunity for additional > consultations with the GAC and the GNSO. > > The draft RFP will be posted and discussed in Cairo, and will be > modified through public dialogue. It is planned that the draft RFP > will be revised and posted again before a final version is posted > for ICANN Board approval. The Board will be informed by this > upcoming dialogue as it considers the final implementation model of > the completed and approved GNSO policy recommendation for approval. > > Sorry this took so long to describe (I thought the note would be > shorter.) I hope the intent and meaning are clear. Denise or I > would be happy to answer any questions you might have. > > Thanks for your time & regards, > > Kurt > > > Kurt Pritz > > ICANN > 4676 Admiralty Way, #330 > Marina del Rey. CA 90292 > > +1.310.301.5809 (office) > +1.310.400.4184 (mobile) > > > > IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]