ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

Re: [council] Friendly amendment to Vertical Integration Motion

  • To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] Friendly amendment to Vertical Integration Motion
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:23:35 -0400
  • In-reply-to: <4ABA98F60200005B00043D61@BRENNAN>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <780A738C62DA734987AC5BD2A90961D197F4C8@cbiexm01dc.cov.com> <4ABA98F60200005B00043D61@BRENNAN>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


With the acceptance of friendly amendments, is there a second for this motion at this point?

I have updated the wiki version. Please confirm that I have it correctly before the meeting.



On 23 Sep 2009, at 21:53, Mary Wong wrote:

Hi all

NCUC accepts the amendment as friendly.


Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
Email: mwong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584

>>> "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx> 9/23/2009 9:19 PM >>>

Set forth below is a proposed friendly amendment to the Vertical Integration Motion.


Whereas, Recommendation 19 of the GNSO policy authorizing the new gTLD process states: "Registries must use only ICANN accredited registrars in registering domain names and may not discriminate among such accredited registrars;"

Whereas, opening up the market to many new TLD operators may call into question some of the assumptions on which the separation of registry and registrar functions is based;

Whereas, economic research commissioned by ICANN staff also suggests that changes in these assumptions might be justified;

Whereas, the new gTLD policies passed by the Council do not provide any guidance regarding the proper approach to cross ownership and vertical integration, but instead implicitly suggest that the status quo be left in place;

Resolved: the GNSO Council hereby requests the preparation of an Issues Report on future changes in vertical integration and cross- ownership between gTLD registrars and registries, to assist in determining whether a PDP should be initiated regarding what policies would best serve to promote competition and to protect users and registrants.


For convenience, I've copied below a redline of the proposed amendment against the motion as originally put forth.


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