<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>Hi Sam,</div><div><br></div><div>Yes…, that is correct. However, there was no resolution taken on the matter during the meeting on February 12th, 2015. The decision was taken over a year ago. This last February, the NGPC discussed the complaint by the new gTLD applicant and reached the conclusion that:</div><div><i><b><br></b></i></div><div><i><b>“<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height: 22.399999618530273px;">After discussion, the sense of the Committee was for staff to continue to move forward with implementation of its 5 February 2014 resolution on the matter.</span><span style="line-height: 22px;">”</span></font></span></b></i></div><div><br></div><div>This decision to not change the resolution from a year ago prompted the filing of the request for reconsideration. There was some question regarding a reference of the original resolution and rationale for taking it, so I was just trying to help clear this up.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks.</div><div><br></div><div>Amr</div><br><div><div>On Mar 31, 2015, at 12:19 AM, Sam Lanfranco <<a href="mailto:Lanfran@yorku.ca">Lanfran@yorku.ca</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Amr & Seun,<br>
<br>
For further clarity, while the initial decision was made in
February 2014, followed by a reconsideration request from Brice
Trail, the Brice Trail submission in the ICANN files dated this
March 12, 2015 is in reference to a decision made this February
12th, 2015. The March 2015 Brice Trail submission states (8.1,
page 4):<br>
<br>
<i>"The NGPC met on 12 February 2015 to address Applicant’s
“concerns ...about staff’s proposed implementation” of a
year-earlier NGPC resolution by way of “an additional safeguard
for the .DOCTOR TLD.” See Annex A at 3. At that meeting [12
February 2015], the Board committee decided “for staff to
continue to move forward” with requiring the additional
safeguard –i.e., the New PIC– in the “implementation” of the
prior NGPC resolution. Id. at 4.</i>" <br>
<br>
It is Board committee decisions this month that prompted concern
around these issues to resurface at this time. <br>
<br>
Sam L. <br>
<br>
For On 30/03/2015 3:36 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAD_dc6ghCnoHKX03NYgJqPrpJeF6KrLKmoBZM7QRG65jHAKfKQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote">Hi Amr,<br>
<br>
</div>
Thanks for this share....first i will say its interesting how
long it has taken since board made the decision. That said, i
find the text below quite concerning:<br>
<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px
solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"> The
GAC advises the ICANN Board to re-categorize the string
.doctor as falling within Category 1 safeguard advice
addressing highly regulated sectors,therefore ascribing these
domains exclusively to legitimate medical practitioners. <br>
<br>
With respect to the additional advice in the Buenos Aires
Communiqué on the Category 1 Safeguards, the NGPC accepts the
advice to re-categorize the string .doctor as falling within
Category 1 safeguard advice addressing highly regulated
sectors and ensure that the domains in the <b>.doctor TLD are
ascribed exclusively to legitimate medical practitioners</b>.
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hopefully the chain of decision making would be adequately
addressed within the ccwg<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Regards <br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Amr
Elsadr <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org" target="_blank">aelsadr@egyptig.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Revisiting this thread again one more time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The NGPC resolution referred to in the
reconsideration request was dated February 2014, not
February 2015. I misread that in the reconsideration
request submitted by Brice Trail, LLC. So the actual
resolution by the ICANN board (or actually, the NGPC on
behalf of the board) on .doctor can be found here:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2014-02-05-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2014-02-05-en</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>…, as well as an annex to the resolution with more
details found here:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-05feb14-en.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-new-gtld-annex-1-05feb14-en.pdf</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I hope this helps clear up the confusion I had a hand
in creating. ICANN policy staff was very helpful in
correcting me on this. Thanks Mary.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks, and my apologies.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Amr</div>
<br>
<div><span class="">
<div>On Mar 25, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Sam Lanfranco <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Lanfran@yorku.ca" target="_blank">Lanfran@yorku.ca</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br>
</span>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div><span class="">For those who missed it, there
is the letter to the Board from Brice Trail,
LLC, the applicant for the .DOCTOR gTLD. <br>
Here (again) is the reference (March 12, 2015)
on the ICANN webserver, plus the first paragraph
of the letter:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/reconsideration-request-15-3-brice-trail-llc-redacted-12mar15-en.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/reconsideration-request-15-3-brice-trail-llc-redacted-12mar15-en.pdf</a><br>
<br>
</span><span><Mail Attachment.png></span><span class=""><br>
<br>
Sam L. <br>
<br>
<br>
On 25/03/2015 8:25 AM, Amr Elsadr wrote:<br>
</span></div>
<span class="">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Coming back to this thread, there was an
expression to see references to the ICANN
Board’s decisions on this topic. From what I
can tell there was a discussion on the topic
of “Category 1 Safeguards for Highly Regulated
Strings” on the February 5th meeting of the
New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) of the ICANN
Board. It looks like there was no resolution
taken during that meeting (<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2015-02-05-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2015-02-05-en</a>).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>However, there was a reference to that
meeting in another meeting that took place on
February 12th, in which the NGPC seemed to
agree on <i><b>“</b></i><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><font color="#333333"><span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px"><i><b>staff
to continue to move forward with
implementation of its 5 February
2014 resolution on the matter</b></i></span><span style="line-height:22px"><i><b>”</b></i>.
(</span></font></span><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-new-gtld-2015-02-12-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-new-gtld-2015-02-12-en</a>)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I’m not sure what resolution was being
referred to, as the report of the February 5th
meeting indicated that there were no
resolutions taken.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I’ll provide any updated info I come
across.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Amr<br>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></body></html>