<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#1F497D">The problem is that governments are supposed to act via passage of laws and treaties. But governments cannot agree on the issues
surrounding geographical indicators and hence there is no applicable law at the global level. Where there is no law, there should be no global constraints on what ICANN or the users do. A claim of “sensitivity,” an inherently subjective term, must not be transmuted
into global regulations just because ICANN can get away with it. If governments want globally applicable constraints on those kinds of names, let them pass and ratify international treaties. If they can’t, then they must stop attempting to use ICANN as a back
door regulator. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#1F497D">--MM<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="#1f497d" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal">
<b><font size="2" color="black" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:windowtext;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font color="black"><span style="color:windowtext"> NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU]
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">On Behalf Of </span></b>Sam Lanfranco<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> Friday, October 3, 2014 7:24 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> Re: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC proposal to ban top level domains that use a geographic word unless permission granted from govt (next rounds of gtlds)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" color="black" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%"><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal">
<font size="2" color="black" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">This may be where I stick my foot in my mouth but I would like to suggest a middle ground here. I see little gain from simply opposing any GAC authority where geographic and similar
gTLD names confront national geographic sensitivities. The issue would not go away and there would be the prospects of either ICANN simply saying “yes” to government requests, or an endless series of one-gTLD-at-a-time trench fights involving ICANN, constituencies,
and individual national governments, trench fights with the potential for considerable collateral damage all around. <br>
<br>
It of course makes sense to support a recommended consultation process between potential applicants and national authorities. There also may be merit to having individual governments convey their recommendations through GAC, and not have individual governments
make recommendations directly to ICANN. In the case of government approval GAC would simply convey approval to ICANN.<br>
<br>
In the case where government objects there may be some merit in GAC having a short time frame review of the case, one that allows for submissions by other stakeholders. If the GAC review does not change the individual government’s position, GAC conveys non-approval
to ICANN. <br>
<br>
This process would have several merits. It recognizes the legitimacy of national interests in geographic related gTLDs, in contested gTLDs it allows for a second consultation within GAC, and it channels government relations through GAC to ICANN. As well, it
starts to generate a body of case law like decisions that begin to set the boundaries on where national geographic sensitivities come into play, and that evolves from within GAC, and not from within ICANN, which should not be making decisions in this area.
<br>
<br>
As for worries that this area of geographic sensitivities would be used against freedom of expression or to curb the activities of civil society, while I always worry about governmental interference in the human rights of people and peoples, I do not see this
issue as a particular threat in that area. <br>
</span></font><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><br>
Sam L.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>