RE: [council] Corrected: US DOC/NTIA comments on new gTLD process

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would think we might be able to come to some position with regard to
geographic names and single character IDNs.

Also, I think that it might be useful to provide ICANN Staff/Board some
reactions to the DoC/DoJ letters.  There seem to me to be some
underlying assumptions by them that are wrong.  For example, they view
ICANN as simply a corporate entity that is making decisions.  Clearly
the Board does ultimately make decisions but not until after lengthy
bottom-up processess involving very diverse stakeholders.

Chuck

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 12:26 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: Re: [council] Corrected: US DOC/NTIA comments on new 
> gTLD process
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am not sure that there are any consensus statements, or 
> even supermajority, we will be able make with regard to the 
> Implementation plan. If there are, I assume the general SOI 
> statements that people have on file should be sufficient.  If 
> not, they should probably be updated.
> 
> The GNSO council might also find that it is comfortable with 
> just leaving the response at the individual or constituency 
> level and not produce a council wide response.  I just think 
> we need to be intentional about deciding what we, as a 
> council, wish to do.
> 
> a.
> 
> On 22 Dec 2008, at 17:46, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> > Does it really matter? I think our goal would be to try to 
> reach rough 
> > consensus on a possible GNSO statement.  By now, I think 
> those of us 
> > who have been involved for awhile, pretty much know the 
> interests of 
> > one another.
> >
> > I submitted quite a few comments and was also involved in comments 
> > submitted by the RyC.
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Rosette, Kristina
> >> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 5:26 PM
> >> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> >> Subject: RE: [council] Corrected: US DOC/NTIA comments on new gTLD 
> >> process
> >>
> >>
> >> What's our plan w/r/t Council members who wrote or 
> submitted comments 
> >> or whose employers submitted comments?  Recusal from discussion of 
> >> those specific comments?  Disclosure alone is sufficient?
> >>
> >> K
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> >> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 12:52 AM
> >> To: Council GNSO
> >> Subject: Re: [council] Corrected: US DOC/NTIA comments on new gTLD 
> >> process
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Thanks for forwardng this pointer.
> >>
> >> After reading this and some of the other comments, and 
> given that we 
> >> have not done much on an organized response yet, it occurs 
> to me that 
> >> we should schedule a special meeting just to discuss comments and 
> >> response to the new gTLD implementation plan.
> >>
> >> Unless there is strong objection, I will ask Glen to try 
> and find a 
> >> time for early next year.
> >>
> >> In the meantime, anyone who is interested in working on a drafting 
> >> effort to initiate something over the holiday period is invited to 
> >> volunteer.
> >>
> >> I will volunteer.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> a.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 20 Dec 2008, at 06:00, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry - forgot the link -
> >>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-guide/msg00175.html
> >>> .
> >>> ----------------
> >>>
> >>> If you haven't seen them, the DOC/NTIA and Department of Justice 
> >>> Antitrust Division comments make interesting reading.
> >>>
> >>> Alan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
>