<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:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
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 lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I have no objection to a reduced application fee. As James and others have argued, however, that isn’t the biggest problem.
<a name="_MailEndCompose">So, Renata, no, I am not opposing a reduction in the application fee. But it didn’t make a big difference last time.
<o:p></o:p></a></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></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"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> William Drake [mailto:wjdrake@gmail.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 24, 2017 3:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Mueller, Milton L <milton@gatech.edu><br>
<b>Cc:</b> NCSG Members <NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Comment on GNSO Community Comment 2 (CC2) on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures / Consultation and review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi MM<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On May 23, 2017, at 21:18, Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Bill Drake said:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">NCSG was centrally involved in raising and then pushing applicant support back in 2009-2011. Are you saying we should now reverse our very public position?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">MM: We did not propose “financial aid” last time. As Rafik explained, we offered in-kind assistance or support with the application process. Even so, the JAS
program was not a smashing success, and people who don’t want to do anything find it a very convenient target. “We tried that, and it failed.”</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s not a matter of ‘we’ offered anything. Various kinds of support were outlined by the JAS cross-community WG and incorporated into the program, and we were involved in their design and supported them. These including both in kind support
and a price reduction to $47,000 among the options, all outlined at <a href="https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support#financial-assistance">https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support#financial-assistance</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I don’t think of what I am proposing as a “reversal” - I am saying we should think it through better than we did back then. A slightly different approach which
emphasizes reduction of entry barriers for start-ups in developing countries might do better. It would also be based on a sounder economic logic. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ok let’s not get hung up on words. We participated in and vocally supported the design of the system outlined at the above URL, including the reduced evaluation fee of US $47,000 instead of the full evaluation fee of US $185,000 for needy
applicants. This conversation started out with you and Ayden arguing against ‘financial aid,’ which I thought meant you were now opposing the reduced evaluation fee we had supported. If that’s right then this would be a what then, a ‘change'? If instead you
meant something else, sorry I misunderstood. I’ve not had time to read through the document Ayden was referring to.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">As Ayden said, consider the _<i>real</i>_ cost of launching a TLD that meets all ICANN criteria and takes 5 years to run a gauntlet of arbitrary GAC, ALAC or
IPC objections. Time is money. Arbitrary decision making is risky, and risk = cost. We require of TLDs all kinds of heavy financial commitments, impose difficult and costly rights protection mechanisms, PICs, etc. which are designed based on the false idea
that all TLDs will become .COM. The true cost is in the millions. If you’re serious about reducing entry barriers, look at the regulatory requirements more than the upfront, direct costs.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">That may be a conversation worth having, although it’s not specific to helping underserved regions/needy applicants, and would of course take us back to debating PICs etc. But with regard to realizing the objectives of the applicant support
program, I’d argue for considering enhancing tweaks rather than a ‘repeal and replace’, and an infinitely better job of outreach (your favorite term ;-) to the potential markets than ICANN did last time. Doesn’t make much sense to create tools and then not
tell people about them.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Cheers<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Bill<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>