[ALAC] Urgent - ALAC Statements on Community Applications

Tijani BENJEMAA tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn
Mon Aug 5 04:53:34 UTC 2013

Good morning Rinalia,


For the first statement, I fully support it in principle. But as I said in a
previous discussion on this issue, I’m a little bit concerned about gaming.
It’s true that the AGB criteria for the community application are very
tight, but who will decide if the application that doesn’t fit the community
criteria has a community support??? Where you will put the limit? 

During the elaboration of the JAS recommendations, some told me that
Verisign (for example) can bring the proof of community support for its
application, and yet, it is purely commercial.


So, I support the concept assuming there are clear criteria for any
prioritized application on the basis of community support.


You will tell me this statement doesn’t go to the details; I agree, but we
can add a word of reserve (pending definition of clear criteria).


As for the second statement regarding the panels, I support it. I’m not an
English speaker, but I find that the language needs to be improved.  





Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI)

Phone:  + 216 41 649 605

Mobile: + 216 98 330 114

Fax:       + 216 70 853 376






-----Message d'origine-----
De : alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Rinalia Abdul
Envoyé : dimanche 4 août 2013 16:16
À : ALAC Working List
Cc : ICANN At-Large Staff
Objet : [ALAC] Urgent - ALAC Statements on Community Applications


Dear ALAC Colleagues,


There are urgent emerging issues related to the new gTLD string contention

that the EXCOMM believes warrant an ALAC intervention.  With the support of

Evan, I have taken the liberty of drafting an ALAC response for your

immediate input.  We need to submit the statements by the second week of

August (latest) to have the possibility of an ICANN response before

community priority evaluation begins.  Please do try your best to provide

comments for improvements or endorsements if you like the text/intent via

the wiki page indicated by Thursday (8 August 2013).


Policy Development wiki page links and statement text pasted below for your

quick review.  If the wiki link is not active, kindly copy and paste the

URL for activation.


Thank you!


Best regards,




*1. ALAC Statement on Preferential Treatment for Community Applications in

String Contention*


WIKI page for your comments:






The ALAC notes that due to strict eligibility criteria, some of the new

gTLD applications intended for communities and with wide public/grassroots

support were not submitted as community applications.  These applications

are currently in contention with those that are fully commercial (i.e.,

driven purely by financial gain).


We firmly believe that applications with demonstrable support, appropriate

safeguards and emphasis on community service over revenue maximization

should be accorded preferential treatment in the new gTLD string contention

resolution process.  We thus support the position of the Governmental

Advisory Committee (GAC) as per the GAC Communiqué dated 18 July 2013 and

call on ICANN to review all 688 applications currently in contention and

provide preferential treatment to applications that meet the specification

described above.




*2. ALAC Statement on Community Expertise in Community Priority Evaluation*


WIKI page for your comments:






The ALAC has concerns about the sufficiency of community expertise in

panels that evaluate new gTLD community applications in string contention



We believe that the evaluations have significant implications for community

applications and require sufficient and relevant community-related

expertise in panels that evaluate the applications.  In providing this

advice we draw from the learning provided by the failure of the new gTLD

Applicant Support Program.


*Community Priority Evaluation *


Module 4 of the Applicant Guidebook specifies that the Community Priority

Evaluation is applicable only for community-based applicants.  The

evaluation is an independent analysis (i.e., not dependent on prior

applicant review results) and that any community application that passes

the Evaluation will “eliminate all directly contending standard

applications, regardless of how well qualified the latter may be.”

Furthermore, community applications that fail the Evaluation will proceed

into auction involving all contending parties where they may be at a

disadvantage against fully commercial applications.


As per the new gTLD Program Timeline indicated at

http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/timelines, we note that the

string contention resolution process will begin in September 2013.  We also

note that the Economist Intelligence Unit and InterConnect Communications

have been appointed as service providers for the Community Priority

Evaluation Panel (see new gTLD Program Update at the ICANN Dakar Meeting in



We have concerns that these entities may have a natural familiarity and

pre-disposition toward business that may discriminate against applications

emphasizing community service over revenue-maximization.


The ALAC thus calls for community-related expertise in the Community

Priority Evaluation Panel and stands ready to offer appropriate and

un-conflicted ICANN community volunteers to serve as panel members or





ALAC mailing list

ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org



At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org

ALAC Working Wiki:

More information about the ALAC mailing list