/
16 January 2013 Meeting

16 January 2013 Meeting

Owned by Berry Cobb
Jan 16, 2013

When: Wednesday, 16 January 2013. GMT Standard Time. 19:00 UTC / This is a 120 Minute Call.

11:00 PST, 14:00 EST, 19:00 London, 20:00 CET

Adobe Connect Link:  http://icann.adobeconnect.com/r1onj8cflqp/

http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-igo-ingo-20130116-en.mp3

On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#jan

The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page:

http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/

 

Participants:
Wilson Abigaba - NCSG
Donna Austin - AuRegistry
Lanre Ajayi - NCA
Alain Berranger - NPOC
Jim Bikoff – IPC/IOC
Mason Cole - GNSO Council Vice Chair - RrSG
Avri Doria – NCSG
Elizabeth Finberg - RySG
Chuck Gomes – RySG
Alan Greenberg – ALAC
Robin Gross – NCSG
Stephane Hankins - NCSG
David Heasley - IPC/IOC
Wolfgang Kleinwaechter - NCSG
David Maher - RySG
Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC/IOC
David Opderbeck - IPC
Christopher Rassi - Red Cross
Thomas Rickert - NCA - Working group chair
Greg Shatan -
IPC Claudia MacMaster Tamarit - ISO
Mary Wong - NCUC

Apologies:
Iliya Bazlyankov – RrSG
David Roache-Turner WIPO
Cintra Sooknanan - NPOC

ICANN Staff:
Berry Cobb
Brian Peck
Julia Charvolen

Proposed Agenda – IGO-INGO WG Meeting – 16 JAN 2013 @ 19:00 UTC (120 Min):

1. Roll Call / SOI Update
2. Status of General Council Request
3. Status of SG/C & SO/AC Input Request
4. Review of Work Package spreadsheet
5. Review IGO-INGO Work Plan
6. Next steps & confirm next meeting



Action Items
1. None

 

Adobe Connect Chat:

  Berry Cobb:Welcome to the 16 JAN 2013 IGO-INGO Conference Call.

  Julia Charvolen:Jim Bikoff joined the meeting

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Hi Julia, apologies for being late, I am here, as is David Heasley

  Kiran Malancharuvil:thank you!

  Julia Charvolen:welcome, I will note that, thank you

  Mary Wong:I believe that NCSG plans to send a response shortly..

  Berry Cobb:Thank you Mary.

  Berry Cobb:and Thank you too, Greg.  :-)

  Avri Doria:some people argue for reservation with registration permission schemes that look very much like licensing schemes.  The case though, not all reservations are blocks.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:What do you mean by "licensing scheme" Avri?

  Avri Doria:the definiton of licensing schemes is broader than a chat.  Will blog on the theme.  but essentially can extend to direct money for permission interactions, to mutual backscratching, to a coincidental donation either pre or post permission.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:all of which would require the organization subject to reservations to be the gatekeeper, correct?

  Avri Doria:what do you mean by gatekeeper

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Also, insofar as it relates to the work of this group, we would advocate that you post to the list, so we can understand.  I don't follow any of your blogs, and would hate for it to get lost space.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Gatekeeper - the person in charge of giving the permission

  Avri Doria:if/when i blog on this topic i will send the list a url

  Kiran Malancharuvil:*lost in space

  Kiran Malancharuvil:great, thanks

  Avri Doria:i would think gatekeepr would have to extend to all who had a voice in the decsion.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:well... if you're suggesting that we would "license" the use of our name for money or favors

  Kiran Malancharuvil:we would be the sole decision maker in that

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I would think

  Kiran Malancharuvil:although if you take it out of the organizations hands, and develop a system similar to what the IOC/RCRC DT advocated on the top level

  Kiran Malancharuvil:then it would address your concerns

  Kiran Malancharuvil:and the IOC has never advocated for a licensing scheme

  Avri Doria:cool.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:and never will

  Avri Doria:I deffinately accept the notion of having all my concerns addressed.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:great.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Thomas, are you asking the IOC and the other organizations present to make a statement about why we think we need protections, even if it's just for exact matches?

  Kiran Malancharuvil:we got cut off

  Kiran Malancharuvil:We are dialing back in now, sorry for the interruption

  Thomas Rickert:thanks for the info

  Kiran Malancharuvil:back in

  Berry Cobb:Kiran, you are in the queue after Stephane.....

  Kiran Malancharuvil:great, thanks Berry.

  Elizabeth Finberg:so, if I understand correctly,  protection of the "emblems" protects the public good by ensuring safe passage and the delivery of humanitarian resources in armed conflict.   The protection of rthe reputation of the organization serves the organization (as opposed to the public good)?

  Kiran Malancharuvil:some of the laws that we cite expressly prohibit use on in the DNS

  Kiran Malancharuvil:also, I think we make these arguments on the sheet itself...over and over

  Kiran Malancharuvil:can we get specific questions about what part of our answers are unclear?

  Avri Doria:Can we differentiate what has happened in .com.org/net versus the other 18?

  Kiran Malancharuvil:yes.  it's on the watch reports.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:which are on the wiki

  Avri Doria:if anything, only the other 18 are relevant.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:why is that Avri?

  Avri Doria:becasue the first 3 of the incumbent have been around since the beginning of time and are in a case different from all added TLDs

  Avri Doria:becasue thee is a psychology that says registrint in one of the top 3 is far more significant than any of the  more recent gtlds.

  Elizabeth Finberg:@Jim, my point is not merely that we identify real harm, but what is "harm"  Is there empirical evidence of harm in the form of diversion of funds from the global public interest to legal fees.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I think that because it's so highly speculative how popular the new gTLDs will be, we should not make those kinds of judgments, but we will show you all incidents of cybersquatting that we record, and others as we can find them, if it helps.

  Avri Doria:we cannot compare what will happen in .gay with what what has happend in .com

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Are you saying that people wont be motivated to register in .gay?  Interesting position.

  Avri Doria:perhaps we can compare wit what has happend in .cat or .aero

  Avri Doria:cute trick Kieran,

  Avri Doria:the situation of community tld with a controlled population do not resemble .com/net/org and finacial arguments or the number of people who want to register is not  relevant

  Kiran Malancharuvil:"cute trick?"  Keep it respectful please, as we are both adults.

  Wolfgang:I am sorry but I have to leave in 5 minutes

  Kiran Malancharuvil:a genuine question... are you saying that cybersquatters are not motivated to register in gTLDs?

  Kiran Malancharuvil:that is an important question

  Avri Doria:i would argue that cmparisons even for non community tlds in the new batch do not match .com/net/org in terms.

  Alain Berranger, NPOC:I need to step out for 5 minutes

  Avri Doria:n any case if you argument holds.  there should be no difference between the metric when applied to the 18 than there are in the full set of 21.

  Avri Doria:Kieren, I am saying that the level of motivation is less in the 18 and will be even less in the 1000's to come.

  Avri Doria:i have not looked at the rate of sqautting in the new versu shte incumbent 3.  so am arguing on what i expect I would see.  As I say, if the rate are the same, then why the resistence to using just the 18.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I suggest not coming to any conclusions about how the new gTLDs will be received.  I think we should look at the incumbent 22.  However, like I said, we are always happy to provide whatever information you request, and we can pursue watch reports that include the "other 18" as well.

  Avri Doria:so it is 19 not 18.  i would be interested in seeing comparative rates as opposed to a single undiffientiated rate.  I  would also be interested in seeing the change rate.

  Greg Shatan:With apologies, I need to leave the call due to the press of business.

  Avri Doria:this group can recommend the criteria for worthiness

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I agree Alan.  Although I don't think that the communication from ALAC is necessarily consistent with that view.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:unless I'm misunderstanding...which is likely

  Avri Doria:in fact as alwasy both postive and negative criteria for worthiness would be a useful notion to explore.

  Berry Cobb:FYI, ICANN Board will be meeting 31 JAN to 2 FEB.  https://myicann.org/calendar

  Chuck Gomes:Thanks Thomas