Hi You will notice on the public schedule that literally all GAC plenaries are marked as closed sessions [C]. I wrote to the GAC chair and said surely this is not the message you want to send to the world about our vaunted multistakeholder open model, the governments come to China and disappear behind closed doors to decide everything while the rest of the community waits outside for smoke signals? She replied that no that's not the intention, she didn't know the sessions were all listed that way, and she would endeavor to get it corrected and some of them opened on the schedule. Well, a week has gone by, the GAC starts meeting here in Beijing in three day, and still there is no notice on either the ICANN or GAC websites that any of the sessions are open to the public. I can understand that they might find it more comfortable to have any conflict over objections take place behind closed doors, and if they want the early sessions this Thursday -Friday to be that way for the more contentious cases, well, it's a mistake but ok. But once the formal meeting starts and everyone else is here on the ground, for them to be barricaded in closed rooms with guards at the door would be really bad form. I think NCSG together with other SGs and indeed any other SO/ACs that want to sign on ought to write a letter ASAP demanding that the regularly scheduled GAC meetings be open to observers as in the past. If history is any guide, most GAC members will be looking at their FaceBook pages and You Tubes of cats drinking from toilets while the US and EU read out what they should all be doing anyway, so what's the big deal about having some of the people they represent gathered around the sides of the room? Thoughts? Bill On Apr 2, 2013, at 12:37 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > our paternalistic GAC and their censorship plans for the Internet .... > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: David Olive <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: April 1, 2013 5:34:20 AM PDT >> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: [Soac-infoalert] GAC draft gTLD agenda for Beijing and advice to the ICANN Board on controversial or sensitive strings and applications >> >> https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee >> >> 31 March 2013 >> GAC draft gTLD agenda for Beijing and advice to the ICANN Board on controversial or sensitive strings and applications >> >> As the New gTLD Program moves forward, the GAC is making preparations for delivering further advice on new gTLDs. This advice constitutes a key element of the overall process as outlined in the Applicant Guidebook (AG). >> >> As anticipated, GAC Member Early Warnings were issued on November 20, 2012, and applicants and GAC Members have been exchanging information with the aim of reaching an understanding or agreement on concerns raised, wherever possible. >> >> In terms of the next phase, described in module 3.1 of the AG, the GAC as a whole will be discussing its advice on new gTLDs. These sessions are organized into two parts: >> >> Part I Safeguard advice on the basis of categories of strings >> >> The GAC discussions will proceed on the basis of advice to safeguard categories of strings that raise concerns, or potential concerns, for governments. There are currently nine draft categories of strings proposed for the GAC’s Beijing agenda. Six were identified in the GAC Toronto Communique: >> >> Consumer protection >> Strings that are linked to regulated market sectors, such as the financial, health and charity sectors >> Competition issues >> Strings that have broad or multiple uses or meanings, and where one entity is seeking exclusive use >> Religious terms where the applicant has no, or limited, support from the relevant religious organisations or the religious community. >> Minimising the need for defensive registrations >> Protection of geographic names >> Intellectual property rights particularly in relation to strings aimed at the distribution of music, video and other digital material >> >> Three additional categories have now been proposed for consideration: >> >> Support for applications submitted by global authorities >> Corporate Identifier gTLDs >> Strings that represent inherent government functions and/or activities >> >> As the GAC looks at these nine categories, and how they would apply to strings and applications falling under these categories, the number of safeguard categories or titles of the categories could change. >> >> Part II GAC advice/objections on specific applications >> >> Twenty specific applications have been brought forward by a GAC Member or Members for consideration by the GAC. The GAC Member(s) putting forward these applications have linked them to the following categories: >> >> Community name where the applicant does not have support from the community or the government: 1 >> Consumer protection: 2 >> Name of an Intergovernmental Organisation (IGO): 1 >> Protection of geographic names: 9 >> Religious terms: 2 >> Strings applied for that represent inherent government functions and/or activities: 3 >> Support for applications submitted by global authorities: 2 >> >> The Operating Principles of the GAC outline the consensus-based approach of the Committee and will serve as a key reference for the GAC in its deliberations. >> >> The GAC looks forward to the upcoming meetings and holding exchanges with the ICANN Board and community on these and other important matters. >> >> >> -- >> David A. Olive >> Vice President, Policy Development Support >> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >> 1101 New York Avenue, NW - Suite 930 >> Washington, D.C. 20005 >> Office: 202.570.7126 Mobile: 202.341.3611 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> soac-infoalert mailing list >> [log in to unmask] >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/soac-infoalert > > > > > 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] > > >