ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[council] Some initial thoughts on GNSO review

  • To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Some initial thoughts on GNSO review
  • From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:36:28 +1000
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcWXuwF1X9opK5w4SgSVvCBgXDUyBw==
  • Thread-topic: Some initial thoughts on GNSO review

Hello All,

Some of the questions I have in terms of the GNSO constituency structure
are:

- should some constituencies merge to form larger constituencies with
more participation?

- should there be additional constituencies to cover viewpoints that are
not currently being addressed  
(e.g application developers - such as browsers, email that are affected
by GNSO decisions)?

- how should companies that have a variety of interests engage with the
GNSO structure?
(e.g Melbourne IT is a registrar, provides other Internet services, is a
business user of the Internet, is concerned about protection of its
intellectual property, and provides services to assist corporates to
protect their online brands - thus it could conceivably join 3 of the
constituencies.    There are staff (and divisions of staff) at Melbourne
IT that would have different interests, and thus may want to become
involved in constituencies that match their interest.)

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>