RE: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration - dated 5 Nov 2010

["Edmon Chung" <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is there any indication if the version to be posted would include provisions
as per the VI resolution?
Edmon



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
> Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:31 AM
> To: 'Gomes, Chuck'; icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO;
> 'kurt.pritz@xxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration -
dated 5 Nov
> 2010
> 
> 
> Thanks for the update, Chuck.
> 
> To the extent that staff are providing you with additional updates in your
capacity as
> GNSO Council Chair, I suggest that all such updates be posted to the list
to avoid
> any suggestion (or interpretation) that you are receiving additional
information
> because you are a VeriSign employee.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
> Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 7:12 PM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration -
dated 5 Nov
> 2010
> 
> 
> I was just informed that the guidebook will probably not be posted
tonight.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-
> > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:50 PM
> > To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce Tonkin; Council GNSO
> > Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration
> -
> > dated 5 Nov 2010
> >
> >
> > I have been told that it will be posted this week, maybe late this
> > evening.
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-
> > > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 1:58 PM
> > > To: 'Bruce Tonkin'; 'Council GNSO'
> > > Subject: RE: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical
> Integration
> > -
> > > dated 5 Nov 2010
> > >
> > >
> > > Any word on when to expect the next version of the Applicant
> > Guidebook?
> > >
> > > Mike Rodenbaugh
> > > RODENBAUGH LAW
> > > tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
> > > http://rodenbaugh.com
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-
> > > council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 1:07 AM
> > > To: Council GNSO
> > > Subject: [council] ICANN Board resolution on Vertical Integration -
> > > dated 5 Nov 2010
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From:  http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-05nov10-en.htm
> > >
> > > New gTLDs - Cross-Ownership Issues for Registries and Registrars
> > >
> > > Whereas, at the ICANN meeting in Nairobi in March 2010, the Board
> > > passed a resolution indicating that as a default position that no
> > co-ownership
> > > would be allowed in new gTLDs, but that if the GNSO were to develop
> a
> > > policy on the subject prior to the launch of new TLDs that the Board
> > > would consider using the new policy for the new gTLD program
> > > <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#5>.
> > >
> > > Whereas, in May 2010, ICANN published version 4 of the Draft
> > Applicant
> > > Guidebook, which included a note that the Board encouraged the GNSO
> > to
> > > recommend policy on this issue, and that the Board would review this
> > > issue again if the GNSO did not make recommendations in time for
> > launch
> > > of the new gTLD program
> > > <http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/comments-4-en.htm>.
> > >
> > > Whereas, the GNSO's Vertical Integration Working Group is divided on
> > > whether registrars should be allowed to operate registries (and
> > > consequentially whether registries should be allowed to operate
> > > registrars). The VI-WG's "Revised Initial Report on Vertical
> > > Integration Between Registrars and Registries" is posted at
> > > <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/vertical-integration/revised-vi-
> > initial-
> > > re
> > > port-18aug10-en.pdf> [PDF, 2.42 MB].
> > >
> > > Whereas, the GNSO VI working group's report includes a number of
> > > proposals to address vertical integration for the new gTLD program,
> > but
> > > the VI-WG has not reached consensus as to which one to recommend
> > >
> <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg09754.html>.
> > >
> > > Whereas, on 23 September 2010, ICANN's Governmental Advisory
> > Committee
> > > submitted its comments on v4 of the Applicant Guidebook, including
> > > comments on the issue of registry-registrar separation
> > > <http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/dryden-to-dengate-thrush-
> > > 23sep10
> > > -en.pdf> [PDF, 44 KB].
> > >
> > > Whereas, the Board has had over six months since Nairobi to consider
> > > the issue, including consideration of the GNSO VI working group's
> > > deliberations, and community comment including at the ICANN meeting
> > in
> > > Brussels in June 2010.
> > >
> > > Whereas, the current set of agreements are not balanced in that
> while
> > > recent contracts prohibit registries from acquiring registrars,
> ICANN
> > > has never had a rule prohibiting registrars from applying for or
> > > operating TLDs.
> > >
> > > Whereas, while ICANN has individually negotiated contracts that
> > > recently have included restrictions on registry ownership of
> > > registrars, cross-ownership provisions have varied over time and no
> > > formal
> > "policy"
> > > on this topic has ever been recommended by the GNSO or adopted by
> > > ICANN.
> > >
> > > Whereas, historical contract prohibitions on registries acquiring
> > > registrars do not provide a compelling basis for principled
> > > decision-making.
> > >
> > > Whereas, the Board is committed to making fact-based decisions, and
> > has
> > > carefully considered available economic analysis, legal advice and
> > > advice from the community.
> > >
> > > Resolved, (2010.11.05.02), the Board directs the CEO to include the
> > > following principles relating to registry-registrar cross-ownership
> > in
> > > the forthcoming version of the Applicant Guidebook.
> > >
> > > 1. ICANN will not restrict cross-ownership between registries and
> > > registrars. Registry operators are defined as the registry operator
> > and
> > > all other relevant parties relating to the registry services.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2. Registry agreements will include requirements and restrictions on
> > > any inappropriate or abusive conduct arising out of
> > > registry-registrar cross ownership, including without limitations
> > > provisions protecting
> > against:
> > >
> > > a. misuse of data; or
> > >
> > > b. violations of a registry code of conduct;
> > >
> > >
> > > 3. These provisions may be enhanced by additional enforcement
> > > mechanisms such as the use of self-auditing requirements, and the
> > > use of
> > graduated
> > > sanctions up to and including contractual termination and punitive
> > > damages.
> > >
> > >
> > > 4. ICANN will permit existing registry operators to transition to
> the
> > > new form of registry agreement, except that additional conditions
> may
> > > be
> > > necessary and appropriate to address particular circumstances of
> > > established registries.
> > >
> > >
> > > 5. ICANN will have the ability to refer issues to relevant
> > competition
> > > authorities.
> > >
> > >
> > > 6. ICANN will have the ability to address possible abuses that may
> > > arise out of registry-registrar cross-ownership through the
> > > consensus
> > policy
> > > process.
> >