Great, it sounds like a good idea - and a good debate, Bill! Tx for submitting, Kathy : > Hi > > I didn't have a lot of time due to deadlines to debate this with folks > in advance, but FWIW I put in a Fast Track budget request to ICANN for > NCUC to hold a workshop/debate on the topic at the IGF Bali. Since > even with NCUC there are strongly differen views, we should be able to > have a rather lively multistakeholder debate if approved. > > I also put in a joint proposal for NCSG/NCUC/NPOC for a workshop on CS > @ GNSO, what works, what doesn't, some critical analysis plus outreach > to potential new participants. > > Both visible at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/view-proposals just > search on my name if interested. > > Best, > > Bill > > On Apr 2, 2013, at 12:51 AM, Kathy Kleiman <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > >> For those of us deeply concerned about Closed Generic TLDs, there >> seems to be some indication that the GAC is moving forward on some >> recommendations in this area.... but the GAC wording posted by Robin >> below is fairly obscure, and we'll learn more in Beijing! >> >> Best, >> Kathy >> : >>> our paternalistic GAC and their censorship plans for the Internet .... >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>>> *From: *David Olive <[log in to unmask] >>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >>>> *Date: *April 1, 2013 5:34:20 AM PDT >>>> *To: *"[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>" >>>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 <http://www.ipjustice.org/> e: >>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>> >>> >>> >> > --