[ALAC] Fwd: Re: AGAT description
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Fri Jan 7 08:55:42 UTC 2011
Dear ALAC members,
At the Executive Committee (ExCom) conference call yesterday, Evan
Leibovitch proposed the creation of a sub-group operating under the New
gTLD Working Group already in place:
This new sub-group would be called AGAT-WT - The Applicant Guidebook
Alternate Text Working Team.
Evan's description of the group is as follows:
The Applicant Guidebook Alternate Text (AGAT) Working Team is intended
to be comprised of a small number of end-user-focused members of the
ICANN community. This Team will create specific wording change proposals
to the new gTLD Applicant Guidebook (AG) designed to address specific
(and substantial) issues raised by the At-Large Community, the
Government Advisory Committee (GAC) and others. Its intent is to
* Respond to Board and GAC concerns within specific areas of the AG
-- notably on applicant support in lesser developed economies and
objections based on strings perceived to be offensive.
* Define an *implementation* of existing policy that differs from
the current ICANN (staff) interpretations.
* Deliver wording (and commentary as applicable) that is
straightforward and does not require "refining" by staff (except
for legal purposes).
* Maintain the consensus decisions made by the Recommendation 6
Cross-Community Working Group (CWG) while offering specific
wording changes to issues on which the group was deadlocked.
* Be open and transparent (though some initial preparatory work may
The group will NOT:
* Re-open non-controversial components of the AG that are already
considered resolved (*).
* Contravene existing GNSO policy (this is about process and wording
detail, not high-level policy.
* Implement any wording going against any consensus achieved by the CWG.
The timing is such that this group is asked to have at least a rough
form of its proposed wording changes available in advance of the
GAC/Board meeting likely to take place in Geneva, at the end of February
2011. Endorsement by as many ICANN communities as possible is desirable,
but lack thereof must not impair its transmission to the Board in time
for consideration. It is our hope that this contribution may serve as a
catalyst for an accommodation between the ICANN communities on such
(*) -- while not on the Board or GAC commentaries, the user-focused
community has strong views on a single regressive change regarding the
trademark-related take-down notices. This Working Team may propose
suggestions here too even though they may be beyond the bounds of the
Board or GAC communications.
The ALAC Executive Committee is looking forward to receive comments and
suggestions from the ALAC on this proposed sub-group. Due to short
deadlines, we cannot wait to discuss this at the monthly ALAC call at
the end of this month.
Would you be in favour of the creation of this sub-group?
Would you be interested in joining it?
I look forward to receiving your feedback.
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
More information about the ALAC