- lac-discuss-es - lists.iana.org

Re: [lac-discuss-es] . Patagonia
by omar＠kaminski.adv.br Feb. 10, 2013

Feb. 10, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re:. Patagonia De: omar(a)kaminski.adv.br El aplicada gTLD ". Amazon" tiene la misma situación o similar. Brasileños, tenga en cuenta. Saludos, Omar 09/02/2013 <presidencia(a)internauta.org.ar> : > > [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] > > Subject:. Patagonia > From: presidencia(a)internauta.org.ar > > Dear as everyone knows is being discussed within the groups one ded > ALAC work the issue of new gTLDs linked to objections > ALAC can be any of them in the context of the afectacin > audience interest. > Today I raised in my point vistaacompaando wiki already silvered > Guillermo Zamora, humberto carrazco, sergio Bronstein, Vanessa Copetti > Cravo. > Many of us in the region are asking for a > negative recommendations for the approval of. patagonia. > We need more voices, we have until tomorrow to do it gives please > go to: https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/.patagonia_OG > make comments, do not know English, do it in your language. > here's my contribution. > > > Dear all: > > > The. Patagonia is a very sensitive issue to the user community and > citizens of the Republic Argentina passes and sister Republic > Chile. > > > This is shown by the fact that there have been two facebook this > issue where hundreds of citizens have spoken openly and freely. > > > 1) https://www.facebook.com/pages/Patagonia-Somos-Nosotros/217649071697459. > and 2) https://www.facebook.com/groups/noapuntopatagonia > > > There are also various activities undertaken by private and public entities will > that is linked to this topic > > > a) http://especiales.chubut.gov.ar/somosnosotros/ > > > b) http://punto.ar/patagonia/ > > > c) http://emebehosting.com.ar/dominios-patagonia.html > > > d) http://internauta.org.ar > > > Among other cases of involvement and commitment to the topic at hand. > > > I am among those who think that the issues have nothing to do geogrficas > with commercial Internet issues, but deal with issues > deeper such as history, culture and the right people > of these to defend their land, their production, their lifestyle, their name > and their present and future. > > > Link to a. Com with NGTLD unhappy is a way of determining the > primary rights of the inhabitants of a region with respect to its > culture, its idiosyncrasies and its history. > > > One thing is to get a. Com with the name you want (eg patagonia.com) > and even put a clothing brand with that name and a very different > gTLDs is to have a geographical region with that name (for example > our friend Evan to put in your comment) undoubtedly that demarcates a > upper right to the common people and left tied the fate of > Regina's the way we do business of that company, for example if > produce any offense, any fraudulent, or facts > issues related to human rights or environmental rights, > regina eyes this world is strongly linked and > reputation, work, production and harmed people. > > > Some links about it: > > > a) http://www.diariodelvino.com/notas2/noticia565_24oct.htm > > > b) > > > > c) http://www.patagoniatp.com.ar/ > > > A pas, Regino territory of a country can not be on edge from > the utilization of its name to the realization of business that does not generate > the state or are wards of the state, and I say this because the > Argentines have very fresh in our memory of the vinculacin > Bennetton company with Patagonia, slave labor and land grabs > the original peoples of this region by the multinational. > > > a) > http://www.oocities.org/identidadlafkenche/principal/conflictomapuche/benet… > > > b) > http://domino.ips.org/ips% 5Cesp.nsf/vwWebMainView/F28DE085DEE5480480256A08004969F3 /? OpenDocument > > > The user community and citizens of Argentina and Chile do not want in > our passes more commercial linkages which could bring DAOA > the production, trade and industry and are not protected and > safeguarded under the laws of our countries. > > > You need to add is not permissible under any circumstances doubt > allow users world that business name get in > risk the interest of a community that lives in a geographical region, its > good name and brand of origin or denomination of origin, as many > commercial products in this region have as their hallmark > provenance (Patagonia) as hallmark and superior quality > whatever happens with the brand name of origin may be > used as an impairment in the quality of the products of the region. > Again I make a gTLD that is different than a domain name > in a gTLD extension ... anyone is aware that the domain name > . Patagonia third one may have to direct the region vinculacin > geogrfica and to a lesser extent with the brand and that reason is sufficient > to not hesitate to give a refusal of Recommendation to ALAC > on this domain name. > > > 1500 Ms interventions in this new gTLD acompaan oposicina this > order. > > > Lastly is to highlight some issues that have to do with the > inalienable rights of Argentina to oppose the utilization of > denomination. patagonia in the new gTLDs and care that name only > just comment that Patagonia Argentina is a land space > comprising the provinces of La Pampa, Neuqun, Ro Black, Chubut, Santa > Cruz and Tierra del Fuego, Antrtida and South Atlantic Islands (including > Falkland Islands, South Georgia and Sndwich). > > > It has a regional official tourism agency: http://patagonia.gov.ar/ingles/ > > > Also mentioned is that they celebrate the day of Patagonia in Argentina > from Law 144 of the Province of Tierra del Fuego, sanctioned > on June 6, 1994 declaring October 11 as da Da of the > Patagonia.The provincial executive implements the second > week of October each year educational, cultural, > recreational and sports aimed at raising awareness of the population > renounced membership of the Province of Tierra del EFuego, Antrtida and > South Atlantic Islands to Patagnica Regin. > > > Just the October 11, 1878 President Nicols Avellaneda > sancionla Law 954, creating such Gobernaciny establishing headquarters > authorities in the city of Mercedes de Patagones, then City > Viedma. In December 1878 Governor llegel Patagonia > Colonel Alvaro Barros. Keep in mind that there are no short that > roads or railways, which the Governor llegen boat. > > > In July 1879 Governor dictel Barros decree the > town of Mercedes de Patagones be called since the > Viedma name, in honor of its founder. Viedma be the only > POPULATION important Patagonia to the late nineteenth century, linked > only by going martima river and the rest of the country. > > > On October 16, 1884 Patagonia was divided into five governorates: > Black Ro, Neuqun, Chubut, Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego. Viedma passes > As the capital of the new Gobernacin, Black Ro Province today. > > > By Law 25,394 was establecial October 11 of each year as the National Day > DELA PATAGONIA in memory of that day of the year 1878. > > > Documentation can count on in Patagonia: > http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_de_la_Patagonia > > > > > > > * Sergio Salinas Porto > Argentina President Internauta > Argentina Association of Internet Users > <http://www.internauta.org.ar> / CTA <http://www.ctamdq.org.ar> > Fluid Latin American Federation of Internet Users > <http://www.fuilain.org/> > > > facebook: salinasporto > twitter: sergiosalinas > MSN / YAHOO MSN / Talk: salinasporto ... > Skype: internautaargentina > Mobi: +54 215 819 9223 5 * > > > * "Ojalpodamos be disobedient, every time we receive orders that > humiliate our conscience or violate our common sense "Eduardo > Galeano * > _______________________________________________ > > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/a5857f080d.html --]]

2 1

Re: [lac-discuss-es] . Patagonia
by omar＠kaminski.adv.br Feb. 9, 2013

Feb. 9, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re:. Patagonia De: omar(a)kaminski.adv.br Brasileños y también hermanos de Perú. Omar 09/02/2013 Omar Kaminski <omar(a)kaminski.adv.br> : > The applied gTLD ".amazon" has the same or similar situation. > > Brazilians, be aware. > > Regards, > > Omar > > > > 2013/2/9 <presidencia(a)internauta.org.ar>: >> >> [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] >> >> Subject:. Patagonia >> From: presidencia(a)internauta.org.ar >> >> Dear as everyone knows is being discussed within the groups one ded >> ALAC work the issue of new gTLDs linked to objections >> ALAC can be any of them in the context of the afectacin >> audience interest. >> Today I raised in my point vistaacompaando wiki already silvered >> Guillermo Zamora, humberto carrazco, sergio Bronstein, Vanessa Copetti >> Cravo. >> Many of us in the region are asking for a >> negative recommendations for the approval of. patagonia. >> We need more voices, we have until tomorrow to do it gives please >> go to: https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/.patagonia_OG >> make comments, do not know English, do it in your language. >> here's my contribution. >> >> >> Dear all: >> >> >> The. Patagonia is a very sensitive issue to the user community and >> citizens of the Republic Argentina passes and sister Republic >> Chile. >> >> >> This is shown by the fact that there have been two facebook this >> issue where hundreds of citizens have spoken openly and freely. >> >> >> 1) https://www.facebook.com/pages/Patagonia-Somos-Nosotros/217649071697459. >> and 2) https://www.facebook.com/groups/noapuntopatagonia >> >> >> There are also various activities undertaken by private and public entities will >> that is linked to this topic >> >> >> a) http://especiales.chubut.gov.ar/somosnosotros/ >> >> >> b) http://punto.ar/patagonia/ >> >> >> c) http://emebehosting.com.ar/dominios-patagonia.html >> >> >> d) http://internauta.org.ar >> >> >> Among other cases of involvement and commitment to the topic at hand. >> >> >> I am among those who think that the issues have nothing to do geogrficas >> with commercial Internet issues, but deal with issues >> deeper such as history, culture and the right people >> of these to defend their land, their production, their lifestyle, their name >> and their present and future. >> >> >> Link to a. Com with NGTLD unhappy is a way of determining the >> primary rights of the inhabitants of a region with respect to its >> culture, its idiosyncrasies and its history. >> >> >> One thing is to get a. Com with the name you want (eg patagonia.com) >> and even put a clothing brand with that name and a very different >> gTLDs is to have a geographical region with that name (for example >> our friend Evan to put in your comment) undoubtedly that demarcates a >> upper right to the common people and left tied the fate of >> Regina's the way we do business of that company, for example if >> produce any offense, any fraudulent, or facts >> issues related to human rights or environmental rights, >> regina eyes this world is strongly linked and >> reputation, work, production and harmed people. >> >> >> Some links about it: >> >> >> a) http://www.diariodelvino.com/notas2/noticia565_24oct.htm >> >> >> b) >> >> >> >> c) http://www.patagoniatp.com.ar/ >> >> >> A pas, Regino territory of a country can not be on edge from >> the utilization of its name to the realization of business that does not generate >> the state or are wards of the state, and I say this because the >> Argentines have very fresh in our memory of the vinculacin >> Bennetton company with Patagonia, slave labor and land grabs >> the original peoples of this region by the multinational. >> >> >> a) >> http://www.oocities.org/identidadlafkenche/principal/conflictomapuche/benet… >> >> >> b) >> http://domino.ips.org/ips% 5Cesp.nsf/vwWebMainView/F28DE085DEE5480480256A08004969F3 /? OpenDocument >> >> >> The user community and citizens of Argentina and Chile do not want in >> our passes more commercial linkages which could bring DAOA >> the production, trade and industry and are not protected and >> safeguarded under the laws of our countries. >> >> >> You need to add is not permissible under any circumstances doubt >> allow users world that business name get in >> risk the interest of a community that lives in a geographical region, its >> good name and brand of origin or denomination of origin, as many >> commercial products in this region have as their hallmark >> provenance (Patagonia) as hallmark and superior quality >> whatever happens with the brand name of origin may be >> used as an impairment in the quality of the products of the region. >> Again I make a gTLD that is different than a domain name >> in a gTLD extension ... anyone is aware that the domain name >> . Patagonia third one may have to direct the region vinculacin >> geogrfica and to a lesser extent with the brand and that reason is sufficient >> to not hesitate to give a refusal of Recommendation to ALAC >> on this domain name. >> >> >> 1500 Ms interventions in this new gTLD acompaan oposicina this >> order. >> >> >> Lastly is to highlight some issues that have to do with the >> inalienable rights of Argentina to oppose the utilization of >> denomination. patagonia in the new gTLDs and care that name only >> just comment that Patagonia Argentina is a land space >> comprising the provinces of La Pampa, Neuqun, Ro Black, Chubut, Santa >> Cruz and Tierra del Fuego, Antrtida and South Atlantic Islands (including >> Falkland Islands, South Georgia and Sndwich). >> >> >> It has a regional official tourism agency: http://patagonia.gov.ar/ingles/ >> >> >> Also mentioned is that they celebrate the day of Patagonia in Argentina >> from Law 144 of the Province of Tierra del Fuego, sanctioned >> on June 6, 1994 declaring October 11 as da Da of the >> Patagonia.The provincial executive implements the second >> week of October each year educational, cultural, >> recreational and sports aimed at raising awareness of the population >> renounced membership of the Province of Tierra del EFuego, Antrtida and >> South Atlantic Islands to Patagnica Regin. >> >> >> Just the October 11, 1878 President Nicols Avellaneda >> sancionla Law 954, creating such Gobernaciny establishing headquarters >> authorities in the city of Mercedes de Patagones, then City >> Viedma. In December 1878 Governor llegel Patagonia >> Colonel Alvaro Barros. Keep in mind that there are no short that >> roads or railways, which the Governor llegen boat. >> >> >> In July 1879 Governor dictel Barros decree the >> town of Mercedes de Patagones be called since the >> Viedma name, in honor of its founder. Viedma be the only >> POPULATION important Patagonia to the late nineteenth century, linked >> only by going martima river and the rest of the country. >> >> >> On October 16, 1884 Patagonia was divided into five governorates: >> Black Ro, Neuqun, Chubut, Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego. Viedma passes >> As the capital of the new Gobernacin, Black Ro Province today. >> >> >> By Law 25,394 was establecial October 11 of each year as the National Day >> DELA PATAGONIA in memory of that day of the year 1878. >> >> >> Documentation can count on in Patagonia: >> http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_de_la_Patagonia >> >> >> >> >> >> >> * Sergio Salinas Porto >> Argentina President Internauta >> Argentina Association of Internet Users >> <http://www.internauta.org.ar> / CTA <http://www.ctamdq.org.ar> >> Fluid Latin American Federation of Internet Users >> <http://www.fuilain.org/> >> >> >> facebook: salinasporto >> twitter: sergiosalinas >> MSN / YAHOO MSN / Talk: salinasporto ... >> Skype: internautaargentina >> Mobi: +54 215 819 9223 5 * >> >> >> * "Ojalpodamos be disobedient, every time we receive orders that >> humiliate our conscience or violate our common sense "Eduardo >> Galeano * >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/c2c9344f1f.html --]]

1 0

.patagonia
by Presidencia Internauta Feb. 9, 2013

Feb. 9, 2013

Estimados como todos saben se esta discutiendo dentro de uno ded los grupos de trabajo de ALAC el tema de los Nuevos GTLD vinculados a las objeciones que puede ser ALAc a alguno de ellos en el marco de la afectación al interes público. Hoy he planteado en la wiki mi punto de vistaacompañando ya lo plateado por guillermo zamora, humberto carrazco, sergio bronstein, Vanessa Copetti Cravo. Muchos de los que estamos en la región estamos pidiendo por una recomendacio negativa para la aprovacion del .patagonia. Necesitamos mas voces,tenemos hasta el día de mañana para hacerlo por favor ingresen a: https://community.icann.org/display/newgtldrg/.patagonia_OG y hagan sus comentarios, no hay que saber ingles, haganlo en su idioma. aca va mi aporte. Estimados todos: El .patagonia es un tema muy sensible a la comunidad de usuarios y ciudadanos de los países de La República Argentina y la República hermana de Chile. Esto lo demuestra el hecho de que se han realizado dos facebook sobre este tema donde cientos de ciudadanos se han manifestado abierta y libremente. 1) https://www.facebook.com/pages/Patagonia-Somos-Nosotros/217649071697459. y 2) https://www.facebook.com/groups/noapuntopatagonia También hay distintas actividades realizadas por privados y entes public os que se vincularon a este tema: a) http://especiales.chubut.gov.ar/somosnosotros/ b) http://punto.ar/patagonia/ c) http://emebehosting.com.ar/dominios-patagonia.html d) http://internauta.org.ar Entre otros casos de involucramiento y compromiso con el tema que nos ocupa. Soy de los que piensan que las cuestiones geográficas nada tienen que ver con los temas comerciales de Internet, sino tienen que ver con cuestiones mas profundas como son la historia, la cultura de los pueblos y el derecho de estos a defender su tierra, su producción, su forma de vivir, su nombre y su presente y futuro. Vincular a un .com con un NGTLD es una manera poco feliz de determinar los derechos primarios de los habitantes de una región con respecto a su cultura, su ideosincracia y su historia. Una cosa es sacar un .com con el nombre que se quiera (ejemplo patagonia.com) e incluso ponerle una marca a una ropa con ese nombre y otro muy distinto es tener un gtld de región geográfica con ese nombre (para el ejemplo que nuestro amigo Evan a puesto en su comentario) indudablemente eso demarca un derecho superior para el común de la gente y deja vinculado el destino de la región a la forma de hacer negocios de esa empresa, por ejemplo si se produjera cualquier tipo de delito, cualquier hecho fraudulento, o hechos vinculado a cuestiones con los derechos humanos o derechos ambientales, esta región a los ojos del mundo se ve fuertemente vinculada y su reputación, trabajo, producción y habitantes perjudicados. Algunos links al respecto: a) http://www.diariodelvino.com/notas2/noticia565_24oct.htm b) http://www.viarural.com.ar/viarural.com.ar/agroindustria/denominaciones-de-… c) http://www.patagoniatp.com.ar/ Un país, región o territorio de un país no puede estar en vilo a partir de la utilización de su nombre para la realización de negocios que no genere el estado o que sean tutelados por el estado, y digo esto por que los Argentinos tenemos muy fresca en nuestra memoria la vinculación de la empresa Bennetton con la Patagonia, el trabajo esclavo y lo toma de tierras a los pueblos originarios de esta región por parte de esta multinacional. a) http://www.oocities.org/identidadlafkenche/principal/conflictomapuche/benet… b) http://domino.ips.org/ips%5Cesp.nsf/vwWebMainView/F28DE085DEE5480480256A080… La comunidad de usuarios y ciudadanos de Argentina y Chile no queremos en nuestros países más vinculaciones comerciales que puedan producir un daño a la producción, al comercio y la industria y que no sean tutelados y salvaguardados bajo las leyes de nuestros países. Es necesario agregar no es admisible dudar bajo ninguna circunstancia que los usuarios de mundo permitan que en nombre de los “negocios” se ponga en riesgo el interés de una comunidad que habita una región geográfica, su buen nombre y su “marca de origen o denominación de origen”, ya que muchos productos comerciales de esa región tienen como sello distintivo su procedencia (Patagonia) como nota distintiva y de calidad superior, cualquier cosa que suceda con esa nombre de “marca de origen” puede ser utilizada como menoscabo en la calidad de los productos de la región. Vuelvo a marcar que es diferente un Gtld que un nombre de dominio con extensión en un Gtld...a nadie se le escapa que el nombre de dominio .patagonia puede tener para terceros una vinculación directa con la región geográfica y en una menor medida con la marca y ese motivo es suficiente para no dudar a la hora de dar una recomendación negativa por parte de ALAC sobre este nombre de dominio. Más de 1500 intervenciones en oposición a este nuevo GTLD acompañan este pedido. Por último es de destacar algunas cuestiones que tienen que ver con los derechos inalienables de Argentina de oponerse a la utilización de la denominación .patagonia en el nuevo GTLD y del cuidado de ese nombre, solo basta comentar que la Patagonia Argentina es un espacio de tierra integrada por las provincias de La Pampa, Neuquén, Río Negro, Chubut, Santa Cruz y Tierra del Fuego, Antártida e Islas del Atlántico Sur (incluidas las islas de Malvinas , Georgia y Sándwich del Sur). Posee un ente oficial regional de turismo: http://patagonia.gov.ar/ingles/ También es de mencionar que se festeja el día de la Patagonia en Argentina a partir de la Ley Nº 144 de la Provincia de Tierra del Fuego, sancionada el 06 de junio de 1994 que declara el día 11 de Octubre como “Día de la Patagonia”. El poder ejecutivo provincial implementa durante la segunda semana de octubre de cada año actividades educativas, culturales, recreativas y deportivas destinadas a concientizar a la población de la pertenencia irrenunciable de la Provincia de Tierra del EFuego, Antártida e Islas del Atlántico Sur a la Región Patagónica. Justamente, el 11 de Octubre de 1878 el presidente Nicolás Avellaneda sancionó la Ley 954, creando dicha Gobernación y estableciendo la sede de las autoridades en la ciudad de Mercedes de Patagones, luego ciudad de Viedma. En el mes de diciembre de 1878 llegó el gobernador de la Patagonia, Coronel Alvaro Barros. Hay que tener en cuenta que en esa época no existían caminos, ni ferrocarriles, por lo cual el Gobernador llegó en barco. En julio de 1879 el gobernador Barros dictó el decreto por el cual la localidad de Mercedes de Patagones se denominaría desde entonces con el nombre de Viedma, como homenaje a su fundador. Viedma sería la única población importante de la Patagonia hasta fines del siglo XIX, vinculada solamente por vía fluvial y marítima con el resto del país. El 16 de octubre de 1884 la Patagonia fue dividida en cinco Gobernaciones: Río Negro, Neuquén, Chubut, Santa Cruz y Tierra del Fuego. Viedma pasó a ser la capital de la nueva Gobernación, hoy Provincia de Río Negro. Por Ley 25394 se estableció al 11 de Octubre de cada año como DIA NACIONAL DELA PATAGONIA en recuerdo de ese día del año 1878. Pueden en contar documentación sobre la patagonia en: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_de_la_Patagonia *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.internauta.org.ar>/CTA <http://www.ctamdq.org.ar> FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet <http://www.fuilain.org/> facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819* *"Ojalá podamos ser desobedientes, cada vez que recibimos órdenes que humillan nuestra conciencia o violan nuestro sentido común" Eduardo Galeano*

1 0

Seminario web: Nombre de dominio internacionalizado (IDN) Variante: Examinando la experiencia del usuario Implicaci�n de las variantes de TLD activos
by staff＠atlarge.icann.org Feb. 9, 2013

Feb. 9, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Seminario web: Nombre de dominio internacionalizado (IDN) Variante: Examinando la experiencia del usuario Implicación de las variantes de TLD activos De: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org Webinar: Nombre de dominio internacionalizado (IDN) Variante: Examen del usuario Experiencia Implicación de las variantes de TLD activos Fecha: Miércoles 13 de febrero 2013 Hora: 13:00 14:30 UTC (5:00 am 6:30 am PST) Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/idnvarianttld/ <http://icann.adobeconnect.com/idnvarianttld/> Dial In: 1-800-550-6865 o 1-213-233-3193 Números internacionales disponibles aquí <http://adigo.com/icann/> ID de la reunión: 46389 Nombres de dominio internacionalizados (IDN), sirven como herramientas poderosas para ampliar la capacidad de la Internet y la accesibilidad, sin embargo, también aumentan la novela cuestiones. Una cuestión importante se refiere a "variantes" que se producen cuando un único personaje puede ser identificado con dos o más puntos de código diferentes Unicode con representaciones gráficas que pueden o no estar visualmente similares.IDN variantes contienen uno o más caracteres tales y por lo tanto, si no se manejan correctamente, puede dar lugar a confusión en el usuario o una experiencia de usuario pobre. En un esfuerzo por desarrollar soluciones potenciales para la delegación de IDN variantes de dominios de nivel superior (TLD), de IDN Equipos de Proyecto variante, que consiste en voluntarios, sin perjuicio de consultores expertos y el personal de ICANN materia, tienen llevado a cabo estudios de casos en seis secuencias de comandos, produjo un informe integrado, y se está llevando a cabo para completar tres proyectos de investigaciÃ³n potencial soluciones para la Variante IDN TLDs delegaciÃ³n. Uno de estos proyectos se llama el examen de la experiencia del usuario Implicaciones de la variante activa Proyecto TLDs (P6). El propÃ³sito del proyecto es obtener una comprensiÃ³n de los problemas que podrÃan derivarse de la activaciÃ³n de IDN Variantes de TLD y ofrecer recomendaciones a los usuarios para evitar estos problemas. Ejemplos de funciones de usuario que se han identificado incluyen solicitantes de registro, registradores, los operadores de registro, administradores de sistemas, operadores de redes, los desarrolladores de aplicaciones y los usuarios finales. El equipo del proyecto ha publicado para comentarios pÃºblicos el borrador del informe final para Examinar las implicaciones experiencia del usuario de variantes de TLD activos <http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/variant-ux-18jan13-en.htm> y estÃ¡ tratando de establecer un diÃ¡logo con la comunidad para refinar propuesto principios, impactos y recomendaciones del estudio. Este seminario se ofrece como complemento de este proceso, tanto por la presentaciÃ³n de la conceptos claves y entradas del usuario recolecciÃ³n. La Variante IDN TLDs equipo del Programa estÃ¡ a la espera de su participaciÃ³n. --------------- Saludos, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisela Gruber, Nathalie Peregrino y Charvolen Julia El personal de ICANN PolÃtica en apoyo de ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org Un mundo, una Internet _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/a6e091e863.html --]]

1 0

RV: [At-Large] ALAC & At-Large involvement in GNSO activities
by Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Feb. 8, 2013

Feb. 8, 2013

Colegas, este mensaje de Alan Greenberg tiene importancia y quizás fuertes resonancias para LACRALO también, especialmente ante el inminente proceso electoral que acaba de anunciar Sylvia. Ojalá sea de su interés. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ Desde: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Alan Greenberg [alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca] Enviado el: viernes, 08 de febrero de 2013 10:05 Hasta: At-Large Worldwide Asunto: [At-Large] ALAC & At-Large involvement in GNSO activities This is a long message, but please take the time to read it. This is my seventh year as the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO. It has always been a challenge, and has at times been exciting, frustrating, productive, discouraging and often satisfying. And I have learnt far more on so many levels than I could even start to recount here. I take some pride at having initiated two PDPs on behalf of the ALAC, and seen them through to create new ICANN policy. One, domain tasting, was so successful at killing a distasteful practice that most people no longer even remember what it was. The other on post-expiration registrant rights was successful in that the resultant policy gives registrants some rights to renew gTLD accidentally expired domains where they previously had no rights at all, but the results were not quite at the level that we had hoped for, to some extent due to the limited involvement of At-Large throughout the process. I, along with Cheryl when her busy schedule has allowed, have been regular participants in quite a number of GNSO activities, both policy and administrative. Others such as Evan and Carlton have made their voices heard as well, and more recently we have seen a few others start to participate. This note is prompted by a number of issues. First, it hopefully will come as no surprise that I do not intend to hold the role of ALAC Liaison to the GNSO for Life. It is therefore increasingly important to have more people knowledgeable about the GNSO and active in its activities, so that when a new Liaison is required, the ALAC will have good options for my replacement. Second, for several years, the GNSO spent far more time than perhaps it should have on its re-organization and reformulation of all of its procedures and methodologies. These changes were mandated by the Board and the GNSO had little choice but to carry out the re-org, but that has now largely been completed. What was a slow trickle of policy work when the focus was on administration is now becoming a flood. There are currently several PDPs active and more coming down the pipe (I am participating in three of them, and I am a vice-chair of one). In addition, the GNSO is under increasing pressure to develop policy through other means, and neither the community nor the Board is comfortable with policy development taking years. The net effect is that the work going on at any time is growing, and there is pressure to get the work done faster. If At-Large is to be able to influence these efforts, it MUST get involved from the very start. And it will take a lot more than one or two people. Issuing comments and advice at the end of the process is simply not going to allow us to properly influence policy outcomes. Lastly, the overall character of many discussions in ICANN is changing. When I started, the "public interest" was a phrase that showed up in an obscure way in the ICANN Bylaws and was rarely mentioned. Users who did not register domain names were generally not considered to be a factor in decisions. With increased ALAC visibility and the Affirmation of Commitment, that has changed. A lot! As the one part of ICANN to have the interest of the billions of Internet users as its core mission, ALAC and At-Large have an opportunity to help drive ICANN in a direction that indeed serves the public interest. But we can only do that if we are actively and intensely involved in activities outside of our little corner of ICANN. We need to be out there, participating and helping to formulate the policies that we believe WILL benefit the public interest and Internet users. And we need to have the credibility so that when we do engage, people listen. I will soon put together a list of ongoing GNSO activities as well as those that may be starting soon. For a few ongoing activities, it is probably too late for new people to get involved. For others, getting involved now will be an interesting learning experience. And as new projects start up, there will be lots of new opportunities. I am prepared to work with anyone who has a true interest in becoming active in GNSO policy activities. Some of these topics are complex and will take work to understand and eventually to contribute. Others will be far easier. But in all cases, helping to formulate GOOD policy will be both satisfying and productive. Alan _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Elecciones llamando para LACRALO Presidente y Secretario, per�odo 2013-2014
by sylvia＠internautabrasil.org Feb. 7, 2013

Feb. 7, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Elecciones llamando para LACRALO Presidente y Secretario, período 2013-2014 De: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org Estimados miembros de LACRALO: A partir de hoy 7 de Febrero de 2013 hasta 07 de marzo 2013, está abierta la convocatoria para candidaturas para los cargos de presidente y secretario de LACRALO para LACRALO el período 05 2013 hasta mayo 2014. De acuerdo a los documentos LACRALO organización, el presidente y el secretario mandato es de un año cada uno. Los términos del actual presidente y el secretario de LACRALO final el 5 de mayo 2013. El actual presidente de LACRALO es JosFrancisco Arce de Ageia Densi Argentina. El actual Secretario LACRALO es Sylvia Herlein Leite de Internauta Brasil. ----------------------------- Si hay algún representante de una universidad acreditada de ALS LACRALO que quieren aplica a ninguno de los cargos: la posición del Presidente o LACRALO la posición de LACRALO Secretario, Por favor, envíe un correo electrónico a LACRALO Secretario: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org ---------------------------------- Calendario de Elecciones Auto-nominaciones serán aceptadas, así como, las nominaciones hechas por representantes de la ELA. La fecha límite para las candidaturas para ambos puestos se podrá visitar hasta el 7 de marzo 2013 a las 23:59 UTC. El candidato debe aceptar o rechazar la nominación hasta 07 de marzo 2013 en 23:59 UTC. Una lista de los representantes de ALSs de LACRALO y se enviará por At-Large personal la lista de correo para confirmar la lista de participantes en esta ALS electorales. HabrÃ¡ 90 minutos de teleconferencia para consultas y exposiciones candidatos a ambos cargos en la semana 8 a 15 marzo de 2013. Si se trata necesario, una segunda reuniÃ³n se llevarÃ¡ a cabo en la semana del 16 a 23 marzo 2013.Como siempre, animamos a todos a enviar sus preguntas por escrito con antelaciÃ³n para los candidatos, sino que tambiÃ©n le permite durante la teleconferencia .. Tendremos siete dÃas para votar en lÃnea para expresar la voluntad del ALS en que serÃ¡ el Presidente y Secretario LACRALO LACRALO durante el perÃodo comprendido entre 6 mayo 2013 a 5 mayo 2014. La votaciÃ³n comenzarÃ¡ el 9 de abril de 2013 y finalizarÃ¡ el 16 de abril 2013 a las 23:59 UTC. Cada representante ALSs recibirÃ¡, dos semanas antes del perÃodo de votaciÃ³n, un credencial personal e individual para votar en lÃnea por el personal de At-Large. Al final del periodo de votaciÃ³n, los votos serÃ¡n contados de acuerdo con la Regla 12.9 de las Reglas de Procedimiento del LACRALO (cada voto es ponderado con el coeficiente del paÃs al que cada ALS es), y los resultados de los votos, se darÃ¡ en la lista por el actual Secretario de la regiÃ³n, Sylvia Herlein Leite. Representantes de ALS podrÃ¡n dirigir sus preguntas o dudas por correo electrÃ³nico a la SecretarÃa: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org en el wiki, https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40928090 a travÃ©s de esta lista de correo. (Todas las preguntas y comentarios serÃ¡n publicados en el wiki). Sin mÃ¡s, Saludos, Sylvia ___________________________________________________ Sylvia Herlein <mailto:sylvia@internautabrasil.org> sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org Secretaria LACRALO-ICANN / 2012-2013 - <http://atlarge.icann.org> http://atlarge.icann.org Secretaria FLUI 2009-2012 sylvia_leite = Skype Descrio: Assinatura_Sylvia_Internautabrasil [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/3af2eceddb.html --]]

1 0

ELECCIONES p/ los cargos de PRESIDENTE/A y SECRETARIO/A de LACRALO- Periodo 2013-2014
by sylvia＠internautabrasil.org Feb. 7, 2013

Feb. 7, 2013

Estimados Miembros de LARALO: A partir de hoy, 7 de febrero de 2013 hasta el 7 de marzo de 2013, está abierto la convocatoria de candidaturas para los cargos de PRESIDENTE/A- y SECRETARIO/A de LACRALO para el periodo mayo 2013- mayo 2014. Según los Documentos de organización de LACRALO <https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/LACRALO+Organising+Documents> , el mandato del Presidente de LACRALO y el Secretario de LACRALO es de un año cada uno. Los términos del actual Presidente y Secretaria de LACRALO terminarán el 5 de mayo de 2013. El actual Presidente de LACRALO es José Francisco Arce de Ageia Densi Argentina. La actual Secretaria de LACRALO es Sylvia Herlein Leite de Internauta Brasil. ----------------------------- Si hay cualquier representante de una ALS acreditada de LACRALO que desea presentarse a cualquiera de los cargos: * el cargo de Presidente/a de LACRALO o * el cargo de Secretario/a de LACRALO, Por favor, envíe un correo electrónico a la Secretaría de LACRALO: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org ---------------------------------- Calendario de elecciones Se aceptarán auto-nominaciones, así como también, nominaciones hechas por representantes de ALSs. El plazo para las candidaturas para ambos cargos estará abierto hasta el 7 de marzo de 2013 a las 23:59 UTC. El candidato propuesto deberá aceptar o declinar la Nominación hasta el 7 de marzo de 2013 a las 23:59 UTC. Una lista de ALSes y representantes de LACRALO será enviada por personal de At-Large a la lista de correo para confirmar la lista de ALS participantes en esta elección. Se organizará una teleconferencia de 90 minutos de duración para Preguntas y Exposiciones de los candidatos/as a ambos cargos en la semana del 8 al 15 de marzo de 2013. En el caso de que sea necesario, se realizará una segunda teleconferencia en la semana del 16 al 23 de marzo de 2013. Como es de costumbre, animamos a las ALSs a enviar preguntas para los candidatos por escrito una vez que sea anunciada la fecha de la teleconferencia, aunque también estará permitido hacerlas durante la misma. Tendremos 7 días de votación online para expresar la voluntad de las ALSs sobre quién será el Presidente/a y el Secretario/a de LACRALO durante el periodo del 6 de mayo 2013 al 5 de mayo del 2014. La votación tendrá inicio el 9 de abril de 2013 y finalizará el 16 de abril de 2013 a las 23:59 UTC. Cada representante de ALS recibirá, dos semanas antes del periodo de votación, su credencial pertinente para la votación on line por parte del personal de At-large de forma personal e individual. Al final del periodo de votación, los votos se contarán de acuerdo con la regla 12.9 de las Reglas de Procedimiento de LACRALO (cada voto es ponderado con el coeficiente del país al que pertenece cada ALS), y los resultados de la votación, serán dados a conocer en la lista por la Secretaria actual de la región, Sylvia Herlein Leite. Los representantes de ALS pueden enviar cualquier pregunta o inquietud por e-mail a la secretaría: sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org, en la wiki, <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40928090> https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40928090, o a través de esta misma lista de correos. (todos los comentarios y preguntas serán publicados en la wiki). Sin más, Saludos, Sylvia ___________________________________________________ Sylvia Herlein <mailto:sylvia@internautabrasil.org> sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org Secretaria LACRALO-ICANN/ 2012-2013 - <http://atlarge.icann.org> http://atlarge.icann.org Secretaria FLUI 2009-2012 sylvia_leite=Skype Descrição: Assinatura_Sylvia_Internautabrasil

1 0

Re: Nuevo programa de gTLD resoluci�n del Comit� sobre "cerradas" cuerdas gen�ricos
by hongxueipr＠gmail.com Feb. 7, 2013

Feb. 7, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Nuevo programa de gTLD resolución del Comité sobre "cerradas" cuerdas genéricos De: hongxueipr(a)gmail.com > > Since I don't now know the business models that are to be adopted by these > so-called closed string registries, I'm disadvantaged in determining harm, > if any. And assuming you could find some, I would likely consider those in > context of the roadblocks faced by say a regular cat lover buying a domain > in the .cat registry and wishing to use it to the greater glory of some > haughty puss. Every man has the right to his poison. Hell, that might just > be a manifestation of one of them cat-loving fetishes like the ancient > Egyptians! Tell me quick, why should that intent be rubbished or > dispossessed? > interprete o monitor o controlar la política de registro (que puede ser los solicitantes de registro y lo que se puede registrar como nombres de dominio) de un nuevo TLD comprometido en la aplicación. Esto no se trata solamente de "cerrado genéricas "TLD cuerdas, sino muchas otras cuestiones, como la protección de OIG / ONG internacional, la gestión de los nombres de las variantes de IDN y el mantenimiento de la "Cercanía" de los dominios de primer nivel de la comunidad. Actualmente, todos los COMPROMISOS aplicación aún no se han incluido en la delegación acuerdo y por lo tanto no estará sujeta al "cumplimiento" mecanismo. Si ICANN cambiar esta actitud de laissez-faire, con carácter general o específico para cadenas de TLD genéricos cerrados? Creo que ICANN debe tener un enfoque holístico ver. Hong - Profesor Dr.Hong Xue Director del Instituto para la Política de Internet y derecho (IIPL) Universidad Normal de Beijing http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China, _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/45d5289d14.html --]]

1 0

Re: Nuevo programa de gTLD resoluci�n del Comit� sobre "cerradas" cuerdas gen�ricos
by carlton.samuels＠gmail.com Feb. 6, 2013

Feb. 6, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Nuevo programa de gTLD resolución del Comité sobre "cerradas" cuerdas genéricos De: carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com + + +1 A la totalidad del lote, las razones y el análisis en conjunto. Su forma más que un 'cerrado' cadena y sus implicaciones. Porque a menos que y hasta que uno está dispuesto a repudiar toda la empresa ICANN, que es decir que arrasar hasta los cimientos, es una ofensa a la razón para esperar objeción a una cadena genérica - Me gusta la definición de Christopher de eso! - ponerse de pie. El barco ha navegado. ICANN existencia entera descansa sobre la monetización de común cadenas. ¿Por qué, porque han significado imputado, y, por extensión, acretan valor. Evan dice bien, una cadena, una palabra común, se hace bien mueble. Alquimia, por así decirlo! Así que mientras que puede ser filosóficamente opuesto a la idea de que el público y la propiedad comunal es expropiada para el beneficio privado, desconfío de tomar la Don Quijote papel aquí. Si no puede demostrar daño o fuera de la ley en una palabra común en el 2 º nivel. Y si no se puede iniciar la sesión en la restitución y la reparación integral del agravio no puedo en razón a ver esta abrazado en el nivel superior. Dado que no conocemos los modelos de negocio que han de ser adoptadas por estos los llamados registros cerrados cuerda, estoy en desventaja en la determinación de daño, si los hay. Y suponiendo que se pudiera encontrar alguna, yo probablemente consideraría los contexto de los obstáculos que enfrentan decir un amante del gato normal la compra de un dominio en el Registro de gato. y que deseen utilizarlo para la mayor gloria de algunos puss altivos. Todo hombre tiene derecho a su veneno. Diablos, que sÃ³lo podrÃa es una manifestaciÃ³n de uno de ellos amantes de gato fetiches como el antiguo Egipcios! Dime rÃ¡pido, Â¿por quÃ© esa intenciÃ³n se desmintiÃ³ o desposeÃdos? Vamos a tener la conversaciÃ³n. Pero seamos claros. Sepa por las presentes que a menos que estemos dispuestos a aceptar viento abajo de la empresa ICANN, que se dedican puramente un ejercicio de sofisma. Palabra. -Carlton ============================== Carlton Samuels A MÃ³vil: 876-818-1799 * Estrategia, PlanificaciÃ³n, Gobierno, EvaluaciÃ³n y Turnaround * ============================= El MiÃ©rcoles, 06 de febrero 2013 a las 1:08 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> escribiÃ³: > The two (concrete, reall application) examples that seem to be used the > most are: > > > 1. .book -- multiple applications, but Amazon's (and IIRC Google's) is > for a closed TLD > > 2. .beauty -- applied for by L'Oreal as a closed TLD > > > My own approach to this has been (what I believe to have been) > straightforward. ICANN has never before cared about the appropriation of > dictionary words at the second level (ie., books.com and beauty.com) > Indeed, much of ICANN's revenue comes from the buying and trading of > speculative domains based on dictionary words (or combinations of > dictionary words) in the hope that someone wants it. There is a whole > industry of domainers based on the hope that buried in their portfolio is > the next "funds.com <http://fund.com>" (sold for $10M) or merely even > just " > cameras.com" ($1.5M). > > To these eyes, the TLD expansion is merely a higher-stakes elevation of > this same game. We have a company, Donuts, that has applied for a massive > number of strings. At this point we don't know whether the company actually > intends to run all the ones it has applied for; it is easy to suggest that > some of its string contentions are for sale in the hope that one or more of > its applications -- almost all for generic words -- is really wanted by > someone who doesn't want to go to auction. > > So ICANN has never had a problem with making dictionary words chattel, > indeed it thrives on such activity. So we then have the added element of > "closed" domains. > > All we know about "closed" TLD proposals is that the applicants have no > intention to redistribute subdomains through the usual supply chain of > registrars and resellers. They intend to control -- ie, own -- all > subdomains themselves. So it is of COURSE natural that the domain industry > would protest. Registrars see an opportunity to sell domains vanish and > speculators complain about the inability to trade domains in a potentially > interesting (translation: "valuable") TLD. > > Given the high amount of industry capture of the ICANN Board -- a similar > level of capture that led to the whole wide-open TLD expansion adventure in > the first place -- it is only to be expected that this industry is unhappy > about the potential of "locking away" domains that it would love to sell / > resell / auction to you. (Remember, policy here is made by the GNSO which > is almost wholly made up of domain buyers and sellers. The public interest > bodies -- governments and At-Large -- have sideline, advisory roles only.) > > So what about the public good? > > As a sheer matter of consistency, ICANN -- and both its industry and > public advisory constituency bodies -- have no problem with closed generic > strings at lower levels so should have no problem with them at the top > level. The logic of how it is benign for Barnes & Noble to close off "*. > books.com" but seemingly evil for Amazon to close off "*.books" has not > yet > been advanced in any but an emotional manner from what I have seen. If > there is no confusion or harm done at the lower level inside dot-com (which > many have seen as a "default" domain to date), it is hard to see how the > same string as a TLD would necessarily cause significantly more confusion > or harm done simply by elevating the whole situation up one level. > > I personally agree that, in general closed ownership of common words is NOT > a good thing. But I happen to believe that for second-level domains too, > and that choice has LONG AGO closed and cannot be undone. Early on ICANN > made a conscious, money-driven decision that domains were commodity rather > than identity, and there is no solid evidence-backed reason that this > philosophy, being acceptable at lower levels, is unacceptable at the top. > There is no evidence that a public that has had to accept -- and deal with > -- closed generic words as second-level domains in dot-com will suddenly > forget this experience when the same strings start showing up at the top > level. > > Moreover, the move against closed domains indicates IMO a short-sightedness > about how domains can be used. We have no idea how the "closed"domains will > be allocated, The assumption is that a closed domain will be used 100% for > internal company use. But I see a potential for creative uses in which a > "closed" TLD owners indeed owns all subdomains but allows others to use > them, perhaps even with long-term committment, for free. With companies not > primarily in the domain-selling business such as Amazon, L'Oreal or Google > getting involved, creative subdomain allocation schemes are possible that > go beyond the binary choice of whether or not registrars can sell them like > commodities. Banning closed domains denies the public from such > experiments, and there is no reason that they should be limited to > coined-word (ie, "dot-brand") strings. > > (BTW, what about closed applications from brand names that are also generic > words, such as Microsoft's application for ".live"?) > > And then there are simple market forces. If enough people and potential > registrants don't like ".beauty" being closed off, apply for an open > ".glamour" TLD in the next round. No single word is irreplaceable, and > thesauruses are easy to come by. > > IMO, the only reason the Board is re-examining this issue is because the > domain industry capture is in force in its opposition, cloaking itself as > "public interest" when the real interest is simple selfishness, maintaining > the status quo and stifling potentially disruptive innovation. To be > concerned NOW about public confusion, after going through years of > second-level-domain prosperity with no "public interest" complaints about > closed strings, easily crosses the line from inconsistency to hypocrisy. > And while I understand -- and am sympathetic -- to the genuine public > interest advocates and GAC members who bemoan the commoditisation of the > DNS and the private ownership of dictionary words, I ask: where the hell > were you when this was a problem at the second level that could be actually > fixed? > > This is indeed a conversation that should have happened five -- or more -- > years ago. At this point, the potential lawsuits likely -- from companies > with bigger legal budgets than ICANN's -- are almost beyond contemplation. > Sure, ICANN gave itself an out in the AG by allowing for retroactive > changes. But this would be a biggie that would certainly leave ICANN > legally exposed -- as it should be, for considering such a 11th hour > redirection. > > ICANN has clearly set its direction; closed generic-string TLDs are > *not* unintended > consequences, they are but a logical extension of everything ICANN has been > about for a decade. Even blocking a handful of applications now won't > change a thing. > * > * > While this may not have always been true*, at this stage* the threat to > innovation is greater than the threat to the public of just letting closed > generics happen; or so it seems. This is not a source of dogmatism; my mind > can be changed on this, but it will take far more evidence and much sounder > logic than has appeared so far. > > - Evan > > > > > > On 6 February 2013 10:14, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > > Olivier, I completely agree. Some might remember > > that I raised this issue several months ago (that > > I thought that the window was re-opening and we > > had an opportunity to comment to the Board if we > > wish). Time is a lot shorter now. > > > > The gNSO has explicitly been asked to comment, a > > near impossibility in that time-frame, even if > > there were unanimity there (which is unlikely). I > > think that the ALAC is nimble enough to do so, > > but we really need some input from ALAC and At-Large first. Quickly. > > > > Alan > > > > At 06/02/2013 03:42 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote: > > >Dear Alan, > > > > > >thank you for forwarding this faster than I could read it. :-) > > >Some might adopt a cynical attitude to this by saying that this is a > > >classic case of the Board having put the carriage before the horses and > > >that this debate was closed several years ago. > > > > > >In fact, I think that it is exactly because of this kind of feeling that > > >the ALAC should be looking at this very carefully. It is obviously of > > >great concern to some Board members. From past discussions, I know that > > >it is of great concern to some of our members whilst some other members > > >do not think it is a problem. Regardless, with the very tight schedule > > >that was imposed, we do not have the option of a reply period nor an > > >extension but either way, I believe that we need to comment on this. > > > > > >Matt will create a WIKI space ASAP on this. A pen-holder is invited to > > >volunteer. Comments welcome, of course. > > >Warmest regards, > > > > > >Olivier > > > > > >On 06/02/2013 04:54, Alan Greenberg wrote: > > > > Note that the Public Comment closes on March 7 and does not seem to > > > > have a reply period. Alan > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/closed-generic-05feb13-en.htm > > > > > > > > ICANN is seeking public comment on the subject of "closed generic" > > > > gTLD applications and whether specific requirements should be adopted > > > > corresponding to this type of application. Stakeholder views are > > > > invited to help define and consider this issue. In particular, > > > > comments would be helpful in regard to proposed objective criteria > for: > > > > > > > > - classifying certain applications as "closed generic" TLDs, i.e., > > > > how to determine whether a string is generic, and > > > > - determining the circumstances under which a particular TLD operator > > > > should be permitted to adopt "open" or "closed" registration > policies. > > > > > > > > The New gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN Board of Directors has > > > > discussed this issue and has also directed completion of a set of > > > > focused research and analysis items to inform any possible action to > > > > be taken. At its 2 February 2013 meeting, the Committee passed the > > > > following resolution: > > > > > > > > Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee has received correspondence > > > > from the community addressing "closed generic" TLDs and understands > > > > that members of the community term a "closed generic" TLD as a TLD > > > > string that is a generic term and is proposed to be operated by a > > > > participant exclusively for its own benefit. > > > > > > > > Whereas, ICANN implemented the Generic Names Supporting Organization > > > > (GNSO) policy recommendations on the "Introduction of New Generic > > > > Top-Level Domains", and within those policy recommendations there is > > > > no specific policy regarding "closed generic" top-level domains > (TLDs). > > > > > > > > Whereas, members of the community have expressed concerns regarding > > > > applications for "closed generic" TLDs. > > > > > > > > Whereas, the New gTLD Program Committee considers that it is > > > > important to understand all views and potential ramifications > > > > relating to 'closed generic' TLDs. > > > > > > > > Resolved (2013.02.02.NG01), the New gTLD Program Committee directs > > > > the President and CEO to open a 30-day public comment forum on this > > > > topic, which should include a call for identification of proposed > > > > objective criteria to classify applied-for TLDs as "closed generic" > > TLDs. > > > > > > > > Resolved (2013.02.02.NG02), the New gTLD Program Committee directs > > > > the President and CEO to, concurrently with the opening of the public > > > > comment forum, request the GNSO to provide guidance on the issue of > > > > "closed generic" TLDs if the GNSO wishes to provide such guidance. > > > > Guidance on this issue is requested to be provided by the close of > > > > the public comment forum. > > > > > > > > Resolved (2013.02.02.NG03), the New gTLD Program Committee directs > > > > the President and CEO to: > > > > - Summarize and analyze all comments submitted in the public comment > > forum. > > > > - Review materials supporting the policy development process > > > > resulting in the GNSO policy recommendations on the Introduction of > > > > New Generic Top-Level Domains and provide analysis of any discussions > > > > relating to the limitations on potential new gTLDs. > > > > - Analyze the feasibility of objectively classifying applied for TLDs > > > > as "closed generic" TLDs. > > > > - Provide an analysis as to whether the public interest and > > > > principles of international law are served by adopting a clear > > > > approach regarding 'closed generic' gTLDs. > > > > - Provide a report to the New gTLD Program Committee informed by the > > > > comments received and analysis conducted, including alternatives to > > > > addressing this issue. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > GTLD-WG mailing list > > > > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > > > > > > > Working Group direct URL: > > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD > > >http://www.gih.com/ocl.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > GTLD-WG mailing list > > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > > > Working Group direct URL: > > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs > > > > > > -- > Evan Leibovitch > Toronto Canada > > Em: evan at telly dot org > Sk: evanleibovitch > Tw: el56 > _______________________________________________ > GTLD-WG mailing list > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > Working Group direct URL: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/00453363e9.html --]]

1 0

Re: El asunto de las "cuerdas cerradas gen�ricos" ...
by michele＠blacknight.com Feb. 5, 2013

Feb. 5, 2013

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: El asunto de las "cuerdas cerradas genéricos" ... De: michele(a)blacknight.com Ellos se reunieron la semana pasada también aunque actas no están disponibles aún Sr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel Via typos iPhone tan excusa y brevedad El 5 feb 2013, a las 13:36, "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> escribió: > Minutes from the meeting of the new gTLD Program Committee of the ICANN > Board. Recall these are voting Board members who are not conflicted inre > new gTLD program. > > http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-new-gtld-10jan13-en.… > > -Carlton > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > _______________________________________________ > GTLD-WG mailing list > GTLD-WG(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg > > Working Group direct URL: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/bc3dc78c11.html --]]

1 0