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

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Chuck that it may be useful for us to react to the DOC letter.
I found some assertions in it that the new gTLD process had not been
researched properly somewhat unfair considering the many years of behind the
scenes work done on this, in particular by the GNSO...

Stéphane 


Le 23/12/08 18:47, « Gomes, Chuck » <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> 
> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>