[ALAC] ALAC MEMBERS: Consensus Call on ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on New gTLD Contention Resolution closing 21 June at 23:59 UTC

Wed Jun 19 09:36:28 UTC 2024

Thank you Justine and all. Thanks for this correction. Clear now.
vanda

From: ALAC <alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Justine Chew via ALAC <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Date: Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 05:43
To: ALAC <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ALAC] ALAC MEMBERS: Consensus Call on ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on New gTLD Contention Resolution closing 21 June at 23:59 UTC
Dear ALAC colleagues,

Please find one additional correction needed. It's to paragraph 4, which should read,

The ALAC advises the ICANN Board to ban all forms of post-application private resolution of contention sets, including joint-ventures regardless of claims as good-faith joint ventures, with possible one exception - where there are community-based applications in direct contention with one another and two or more of them prevail in a Community Priority Evaluation (CPE), then ICANN may postpone the auction for a limited period of time to allow such parties to reach a settlement before proceeding to auction involving only them (as currently provided for in s. 4.2.2 or the 2012 Application Guidebook).

Kind regards,
Justine

On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 06:00, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann at gmail.com<mailto:justine.chew.icann at gmail.com>> wrote:
There are some errors in the second last paragraph. It should read,

In other words, the ALAC supports the overall intention of the Subsequent Procedures PDP Recommendation 35.4 which the GNSO Council chose not to submit to the ICANN Board for adoption, EXCEPT FOR (a) the provision allowing participation in various forms of private resolution; (b) the allowance for applicants whose applications are caught or are added to any contention sets that are expanded as a result of other application procedures to submit a fresh bid; and (c) the provision that ICANN Auctions must only take place after all the other evaluation procedures, and objections are completed.

Kind regards,
Justine
---------

On Tue, 18 Jun 2024, 23:21 ICANN At-Large Staff via ALAC, <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>> wrote:
Dear All,

On behalf of Jonathan Zuck, ALAC Chair, this is a three-day Consensus call for the 15 members of the ALAC on the ALAC Advice to the ICANN Board on New gTLD Contention Resolution.

The Consensus call will close on Friday, 21 June at 23:59 UTC.

Please let us know if you have any significant comments or concerns on the ALAC Advice.

**

At-Large Advisory Committee Advice to the ICANN Board on New gTLD Contention Resolution

In her 3 June 2024 Blog <https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/board-discusses-auctions-of-last-resort-private-resolution-of-contention-sets-03-06-2024-en>, the ICANN Board Chair reiterated that “the Board is not inclined to sanction a repeat of the 2012 process when private resolutions were encouraged in the Applicant Guidebook.”

The ALAC strongly supports this statement by the ICANN Board Chair.

The ALAC agrees with the National Economic Research Associates (NERA) which said in its report of 17 May 2024 <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/addressing-monetary-means-private-resolution-final-report-17may24-en.pdf> that attempting to eliminate private auctions or comparable monetary resolutions while allowing legitimate post-application “joint ventures” would be difficult or impossible, and its conclusion that a ban on private resolutions would have to include all forms, including joint ventures. While also noting the lack of such post-application joint ventures being formed to as a means to resolve contention sets in the 2012 round, the ALAC now reiterates and expands upon its previous advice.

The ALAC advises the ICANN Board to ban all forms of post-application private resolution of contention sets, including joint-ventures regardless of claims as good-faith joint ventures.

Furthermore, the ALAC advises the ICANN Board to adjust the ICANN Auction of Last Resort to an auction process a methodology comparable to a Vickrey Auction (sealed-bid second-price auction - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickrey_auction [en.wikipedia.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickrey_auction__;!!PtGJab4!5_mw9p8LH53CKdy0Qa_hrpCzu8E1QHSvqcPQXg2ciD8heLDDYij8iwoB84wIWYX3tF4wmVe1bIwygRGX6pzj3IQ97DuyOttfCiK2HA$>) requiring each gTLD string application to be accompanied by an auction bid at the time the application is submitted, and prior to any indication of possible contention sets being formed.

Firstly, requiring an applicant to submit an accompanying auction bid with its application - and if more than one application, a bid with each of its applications - helps the applicant demonstrate the bona fide intention of operating a TLD that it affirmatively attests to.

Secondly, Vickrey auctions mitigate, if not eliminate, any ability to abuse or game the application process since bids are submitted prior to knowing if there are any competitors and who they may be.

Thirdly, ICANN may be able to capitalize on opportunities to reduce application evaluation costs, for both ICANN org and applicants, in cases where there are multiple contenders for the same string, by strategically positioning the ICANN Auction as a process of elimination earlier in the evaluation cycle, rather than as a contention set resolution mechanism of last resort, thereby foregoing the need for evaluation processes which can reasonably be avoided. However, this consideration must not displace the option for Community Priority Evaluation (CPE) by Community-based TLD applicants that opt for the CPE in an attempt to prevail out of a contention set.

In other words, the ALAC supports the overall intention of the Subsequent Procedures Recommendation 35.4 which the GNSO Council chose not to submit to the ICANN Board for adoption, EXCEPT FOR (a) the provision allowing participation in various forms of private resolution; (b) the allowance for applicants whose applications that are caught or are added to any contention sets that are expanded as a result of other application procedures to as a result of other application procedures; and (c) the provision that ICANN Auctions would only take place after all the other evaluation procedures, and objections are completed.

The ALAC would be pleased to enter into further dialogue with the Board on any of these issues.
**

Kind regards,

At-Large Staff
ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community
Website: atlarge.icann.org<https://atlarge.icann.org/>
Facebook: facebook.com/icann<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>atlarge<https://www.facebook.com/icannatlarge>
Twitter: @<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>ICANNAtLarge<https://twitter.com/ICANNAtLarge>

Error! Filename not specified.
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20240619/667457b2/attachment-0001.html>