[ALAC] Red Cross/IOC - Questions for Consensus Call - Reply due by September 26th

Thu Sep 20 02:01:30 UTC 2012

The issue on the table is not the large protection of IGO names that 
is the subject of the IR, but just the RC/IOC and just for the first round

Alan

At 19/09/2012 08:15 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>Hi Alan,
>
>Yes I noted the Board Resolution which you sent in your introductory 
>call for comments and also that the Policy work would not be 
>concluded prior to January 13, 2012 for obvious reasons. What I am 
>concerned about is the delay in the Final Issues paper because any 
>submissions we make may very likely miss key things raised in the 
>Final Issues paper. I also note that you have advised that it will 
>be out shortly. :)
>
>I will prepare submissions anyway but they will be made with the 
>express caveat that there may be things raised in the Final Issues 
>report that we have not considered.
>
>Sala
>
>On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Alan Greenberg 
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>The most recent update (from the GNSO Council meeting of 13 Sep) can
>be found at
><http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/presentation-pending-final-issue-report-intl-org-names-13sep12-en.pdf>http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/presentation-pending-final-issue-report-intl-org-names-13sep12-en.pdf.
>
>The final Issue Report should be issued any day now, with the intent
>to have it on the GNSO agenda for its Council meeting in Toronto. It
>is possible that a PDP could be approved at that point, but as likely
>it will be deferred until the next meeting (Council rules call for an
>automatic deferral if any Council member says that more time is
>needed). Once approved, a Drafting Team would be convened for draft
>the charter.
>
>Alan
>
>At 19/09/2012 07:21 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
> >Dear Alan,
> >
> >I support your recommendation and appreciate the rationalization
> >that accompanied the recommendation.
> >
> >I agree with both Sala and Evan that the "linking" of the IOC and
> >the RC is not ideal, but acceptable for the moment.
> >
> >On the PDP that is being considered on the larger IGO issue, can you
> >provide your best estimate as to when the GNSO might move on it?
> >
> >Thank you!
> >
> >Best regards,
> >
> >Rinalia
> >
> >On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Evan Leibovitch
> ><<mailto:evan at telly.org>evan at telly.org> wrote:
> >Hi Alan,
> >
> >Thanks for the heads up. Your approach and rationale sound quite reasonable.
> >
> >I am reminded of the work done that led to this:
> >
> >*- In recent statements, the ALAC has been more sympathetic with the case
> > > of the Red Cross than with the IOC. However, the two are firmly linked at
> > > this time (although they could be delinked in a future
> > > PDP), so the only way to offer protection to the RC is to do it to both
> > > organizations.*
> > >
> >
> >In my personal opinion, ICANN's senseless refusal to delink does not negate
> >the need to continue to maintain these are two separate issues. At one
> >level, I feel strongly enough about it that if forced the choice to protect
> >both or neither, I would advocate to choose neither -- so convinced am I
> >regarding the harm done by protecting the IOC, based on our previous work.
> >But this approach sounds unlikely to gain traction ICANN-wide, so what you
> >propose is OK with me as a second choice.
> >
> >- Evan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > - The recommendation is about as conservative as it could be given
> > > that the organizations wanted protection for a far wide range of
> > > languages than was originally requested in the GAC letter
> > >
> > 
> (<<https://gacweb.icann.org/display/GACADV/2011-09-14-IOCRC-1>https://gacweb.icann.org/display/GACADV/2011-09-14-IOCRC-1>https://gacweb.icann.org/display/GACADV/2011-09-14-IOCRC-1).
> > And of
> > > course it is exact matches only and not the more flexible protection
> > > that they would prefer.
> > >
> > > Although not a rationale for doing this, it should be noted that if
> > > the GNSO either makes no recommendation or takes a more rigid
> > > position that no additional protections should be granted, it is
> > > likely (in my opinion) that the Board will do something of this sort
> > > anyway, creating a very time-and energy-consuming issue with no real
> > > benefit.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ALAC mailing list
> > > <mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> > >
> > > At-Large Online: 
> <<http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > > ALAC Working Wiki:
> > >
> > 
> <<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Evan Leibovitch
> >Toronto Canada
> >
> >Em: evan at telly dot org
> >Sk: evanleibovitch
> >Tw: el56
> >_______________________________________________
> >ALAC mailing list
> ><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.ica 
> nn.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> >At-Large Online: 
> <<http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> >ALAC Working Wiki:
> ><<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Com 
> mittee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: 
><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
>
>
>
>--
>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>P.O. Box 17862
>Suva
>Fiji
>
>Twitter: @SalanietaT
>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>