RE: [council] Friendly amendment to VI Charter

["Caroline Greer" <cgreer@xxxxxxxxx>]

Yes. Hopefully it is considered a friendly amendment [the replacement of 
*equal* with *equivalent*]. Stéphane (and Mary), what do you think?
 
Thanks,
 
Caroline.
 
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 05 March 2010 13:11
To: Stéphane Van Gelder; Caroline Greer
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Friendly amendment to VI Charter
 
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.