RE: [council] Friendly amendment to VI Charter

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

Caroline,
 
Are you proposing this as an amendment before the motion is voted on?
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder
        Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 7:15 AM
        To: Caroline Greer
        Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [council] Friendly amendment to VI Charter
        
        
        Caroline, 

        Thank you for your message. Please note that the DT recognised that the 
definitions were works in progress. However, within the time we had to produce 
a charter, it would have been impossible to refine the definitions. This is why 
the following footnote was included:

        The working definitions included in this charter are subject to further 
development and refinement by Staff, but are included in the interests of time 
in order to allow the remainder of the charter to be finalized and approved by 
the GNSO Council.  

        It was the DT's expectation that the WG would continue to work on the 
definitions.

        Stéphane   
        
        
        Le 5 mars 2010 à 11:40, Caroline Greer a écrit :


                Dear All,
                
                The Registries Stakeholder Group [RySG] would like to propose a 
friendly amendment to the Vertical Integration Charter circulated by Stéphane.
                
                For purposes of accuracy and consistency, we believe that 
Objective #4 should be revised to read: "To identify and clearly articulate the 
differences between the current restrictions and practices concerning 
registry-registrar separation and equivalent access, on the one hand, and the 
options described in the most recent version of the DAG and supporting 
documents[1] and changes considered by staff, on the other hand."
                
                The words "equivalent access" in yellow would replace the words 
"equal access" that are in the current version of Objective #4. We understand 
that the Charter Group has recognized the difference between "equal access" and 
"equivalent access" in its deliberations and has adopted "equivalent access" in 
other parts of the Charter.
                
                More generally, the RySG notes that the proposed working 
definitions in the Charter are neither accurate nor complete and, in certain 
cases, they represent policy statements.  The RySG underscores the importance 
of developing standalone definitions for each element of vertical integration.  
However, these definitions should be developed by experts in competition and 
antitrust matters and derived from, where possible, language in ICANN contracts 
and ICANN documentation that uses the relevant terms.     
                
                Many thanks.
                
                Kind regards,
                
                Caroline.
                
                
                

________________________________

                [1] The working group understands that the DAG is a fluid 
document.  As a result, the working group will conduct its activities based 
upon the version of the document available.