Legitimacy is the important point and i would think that it is important to have it written down. However support we need to give to commercial entities we need to respect some key things and somehow i would understand the need for GAC to express some areas of concern. Coming down to ccTLDs not all run in the interest of the country code level and some are more independent commercial entities where ICANN have no say in them and i can certainly quote a few. There needs to be some legitimacy concerns for sure. > On Oct 4, 2014, at 12:28 AM, Seun Ojedeji <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Carlos Raúl G. <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > Dear Robin, > > What if, under the same concept of subsidiarity, instead of Governments, this responsibility would be delegated to the respective ccTLDs? Would it be more or less legitimate? Let me tell you that at least in the case of Costa Rica, our Government is more accountable and far more bottom up than the ccTLD chosen by ICANN. > > After the sour experience with .amazon and .patagonia I certainly agree that changes are necessary, probably at many levels. > > Which if you ask me was treated rightly in the long run(at least am sure of .amazon), however i agree that its good to have this written in the guideline so applicants who don't meet the criteria don't even make the attempt of applying in the first place. > > Cheers! > > If you have a better suggestion, I would love to hear it. > > Best > > Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez > +506 8335 2487 <tel:%2B506%208335%202487> > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 3/10/2014, a las 13:17, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> escribió: > >> I think we should submit comments on this proposal from a GAC Sub-group on Geographic Names in future gtld rounds to "respect national sensitivities". >> >> In short, the GAC proposal calls for a change in the policy in the applicant guidebook to require applicants to obtain the permission of governments before they can use a word that could be considered a country, territory or place name, and country, territory or regional language or people descriptions. >> >> GAC wants to override the GNSO's policy from 2008 and the AGB. GAC relies heavily on the presumption that restricting gtlds in this fashion is automatically in the public interest and therefore ICANN must do it. Of course it will have the effect of dramatically restricting speech in tlds and further empowering governments over people's use of the Internet. Unfortunately the GACification of ICANN continues apace. Sigh. >> >> Robin >> >> https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee <https://gacweb.icann.org/display/gacweb/Governmental+Advisory+Committee> >> Draft document from GAC Sub-group on Geographic Names - Community input sought >> The GAC Sub-group on Geographic Names (a Sub-group of the GAC Working Group on Future New gTLDs) has developed a draft document for future New gTLD rounds outlining several public policy aspects related to geographic names and is currently seeking community input on this document: >> >> The protection of geographic names in the new gTLDs process <https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Geo%20names%20in%20new%20gTLDs%20Updated%20%20V3%20%2029%20august%202014%5B4%5D.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1411549935692&api=v2>. >> >> A previous version of this draft was presented in a public session during the London ICANN/GAC meetings and a similar session is planned for the October ICANN/GAC meetings in Los Angeles. The Working Group believes the receipt of community input on the current draft document would be beneficial to the October discussions, and further welcomes comments from all interested parties by October 31, 2014. >> >> Comments may be submitted to [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> . >> >> Comments received will be posted on the Community Input page at: http://tinyurl.com/nc4knhn <http://tinyurl.com/nc4knhn>. >> >> ----------------------- >> Paper's Conclusion: >> >> ... Suggested changes in the Applicant Guide Book >> >> Taking into consideration that the Durban Communiqué states that “The GAC recommends that ICANN collaborate with the GAC in refining, for future rounds, the Applicant Guidebook with regard to the protection of terms with national, cultural, geographic and religious significance, in accordance with the 2007 GAC Principles on New gTLDs”, a new text is suggested regarding the geographic names, in the case that the same text of the present AGB will be used as ground document: >> >> To include in the paragraph 2.2.1.4 of the AGB the following sentence: >> >> “ICANN should avoid country, territory or place names, and country, territory or regional language or people descriptions, unless in agreement with the relevant governments or public authorities”. >> >> Also the following paragraph appears in the section “2.2.1.4.2 Geographic Names Requiring Government Support” of the AGB. It should be a general statement or principle regarding geographic names, in order to clarify and reinforce the importance of the previous communication between the Applicants and the Governments, even in case of any doubt. >> >> “Nevertheless, in the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s interest to consult with relevant governments and public authorities and enlist >> >> their support or non-objection prior to submission of the application, in order to preclude possible objections and pre-address any ambiguities concerning the string and applicable requirements.” >> >> A specific reference to the Geographic Names Repository described in section 6.b of this document must be also included. >> >> The suggested changes in the Applicant Guide Book, paragraph 2.2.1.4 of the AGB should read as follows: >> >> “2.2.1.4 Geographic Names Review >> >> Applications for gTLD strings must ensure that appropriate consideration is given to the interests of governments or public authorities in geographic names, taking into consideration that, according with the 2007 GAC Principles regarding New gTLDs, ICANN should avoid country, territory or place names, and country, territory or regional language or people descriptions, unless in agreement with the relevant governments or public authorities. The requirements and procedure ICANN will follow in the evaluation process are described in the following paragraphs. Applicants should review these requirements even if they do not believe their intended gTLD string is a geographic name. All applied-for gTLD strings will be reviewed according to the requirements in this section, regardless of whether the application indicates it is for a geographic name. >> >> “Nevertheless, in the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s interest to consult with relevant governments and public authorities and enlist their support or non-objection prior to submission of the application, in order to preclude possible objections and pre-address any ambiguities concerning the string and applicable requirements.” >> >> > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Seun Ojedeji, > Federal University Oye-Ekiti > web: http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng/> > Mobile: +2348035233535 <> > alt email: <http://goog_1872880453/>[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > The key to understanding is humility - my view ! > Kris Seeburn [log in to unmask] www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/>