Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] The Google campaign – An ITU view

[McTim]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Lerato <lerato.ma at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I say read the guidebook!


I have...again, just to make sure we are reading the same book:

http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/evaluation-procedures-04jun12-en.pdf

Says:

2.2.1.4.2 Geographic Names Requiring Government
Support
.
.
.
4. An application for a string listed as a UNESCO
region or appearing on the “Composition of
macro geographical (continental) regions,
geographical sub-regions, and selected economic
and other groupings” list.

In the case of an application for a string appearing
on either of the lists above, documentation of
support will be required from at least 60% of the
respective national governments in the region, and
there may be no more than one written statement
of objection to the application from relevant
governments in the region and/or public authorities
associated with the continent or the region."


So, given the multiple Early Warnings from GAC members,
I don't see how DCA gets over the 60%/no more than one written statement
of objection barrier.  Can you explain this please?



AND  it also says:


"An applied-for gTLD string that falls into any of 1 through 4
listed above is considered to represent a geographic
name. In the event of any doubt, it is in the applicant’s
interest to consult with relevant governments and public
authorities and enlist their support or non-objection prior to
submission of the application, in order to preclude possible
objections and pre-address any ambiguities concerning
the string and applicable requirements. "


So your competition did EXACTLY what ICANN advised, and
DCA calls them corrupt for it??

Seriously??


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel