ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

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

AW: AW: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS

Thanks Jeff.
 
Pls. see my comments inserted.
 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen 
Best regards 
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 


Deutsche Telekom AG  
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 
Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 3-7 
D - 64295 Darmstadt 
+49 2244 873999 (Tel.) 
+49 2151 5300 5206 (PC-Fax) 
+49 151 1452 5867 (Mobil) 
http://www.telekom.com <http://www.telekom.com/>  

Deutsche Telekom AG 
Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) 
Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender) 
Timotheus Höttges (stellvertretender Vorsitzender) 
Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Guido Kerkhoff, Edward R. 
Kozel, Thomas Sattelberger 
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn 
WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE50478376 

 


  _____  

Von: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Januar 2011 00:05
An: Neuman, Jeff; 'stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx'; Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich
Cc: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Betreff: RE: AW: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS



Here are the reasons in more detail as to why I cannot accept the amendments as 
friendly.  The provisions added are in italics, and my comments are in ALL CAPS 
below Wolf's added provisions:

 

e) Discuss and propose methods for coordinating any assistance volunteered by 
providers (consultants, translators, technicians, etc.); match services to 
qualified applicants; broker these relationships and review the operational 
quality of the relationship.

THIS CONCEPT WAS COVERED ALREADY IN MY (E) WHICH STATES:  "e) Propose methods 
for applicants to seek out assistance  from other top-level domain consultants, 
translators, and technicians,  in the application for, and administration of, a 
new top-level domain)".  THE RYSG AND RRSG DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS GROUP HAS 
THE EXPERTISE, KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE TO "MATCH SERVICES TO QUALIFIED 
APPLICANTS", NOR IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS WORKING GROUP TO "BROKER THESE 
RELATIONSHIPS AND REVIEW THE OPERATIONAL QUALITY OF THE RELATIONSHIP."  
[WUK: ] First we have to clarify which items should be covered by the WG, and 
secondly the expert/expertise question has to be solved but not vice versa.

I think the first part of e) should incorporate both sides ("Discuss and 
propose methods for coordinating any assistance sought out for applicants and 
those volunteered by providers... "). If "match services..., broker these 
relationships and review..." is beyond of what the RySG and RrSG accepts as 
being in the scope of policy development then at least the policy related 
aspects of these items should be taken into consideration which would lead e) 
to "Discuss and propose methods for 1. coordinating any assistance...2. 
matching services...3. brokering these relationships and reviewing...

I wonder whether others involved could live with that.

 f) Propose methods for coordinating cooperation among qualified applicants, 
and assistance volunteered by third parties.

THIS IS SEEMINGLY COVERED BY MY PROPOSED (E) TO THE EXTENT IN SCOPE. 
[WUK: ] see above 

g) In cooperation with ICANN Staff and donor experts propose policies and 
practices for fundraising and for establishing links to possible donor 
agencies. This activity may include assisting in the establishment of initial 
relationships with any donor(s) who may be able to help in first round with 
funding

THIS AGAIN SEEMS TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF THIS WORKING GROUP TO "ESTABLISH LINKS 
TO DONOR AGENCIES AND ASSISTING IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INITIAL RELATIONSHIPS.  
HOW IS THIS A POLICY ACTIVITY?
[WUK: ] If policy related scope is asked for then the first sentence covers 
this. The 2nd sentence could be removed from my point of view although it 
states just "may include..."

h) Review the basis of the US$100,000 application base fee to determine its 
full origin and to propose a percentage of that fee could be waived for 
applicants meeting the requirements for assistance. Work with the ICANN new 
gTLD implementation staff to determine how the fee waivers would be 
accommodated.

ICANN HAS ALREADY PROVIDED SUBSTANTIAL DOCUMENTATION AS TO WHERE THIS FEE HAS 
BEEN DERIVED AND SOLICITED COMMENTS THROUGH AT LEAST FIVE ROUNDS OF COMMENTS 
ALREADY ON THIS.  THE LAST SENTENCE "WORK WITH THE ICANN NEW GTLD 
IMPLEMENTATION TO DETERMINE HOW THE FEE WAIVERS WOULD BE ACCOMMODATED".  THIS 
ALSO DOES NOT SEEM TO US TO BE A POLICY ISSUE AND THEREFORE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF 
THE GNSO.
[WUK: ] I could agree 

i) Design mechanisms to encourage the build out of Internationalized Domain 
Names (IDNs) in small or underserved languages.

THIS LAST ONE IS STILL UNDER DISCUSSION WITH THE RYSG AND A FORM OF THIS WE 
(THE RYSG) COULD CONSIDER ADDING AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.  ALTHOUGH THE RYSG 
CERTAINLY IS NOT AGAINST ENCOURAGING THE BUILD OUT OF IDNS, THE QUESTION WAS 
WHETHER THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE ACTIVITY OF A GNSO-SPONSORED GROUP.  OTHERS IN 
THE RYSG FEEL LIKE THERE MAY BE SOME MIDDLE GROUND HERE AND WE ARE THEREFORE 
WORKING ON IT.

I hope that helps explain my thinking with respect to Wolf's proposed 
amendments.

Thanks.                                                                         
                                                                                
                     

 

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy




  _____  


The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.

 

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 10:30 AM
To: 'stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx'; 'KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Re: AW: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS

 

For the reasons I will more fully explain tonight in an e-mail (when I have a 
break) I cannot accept these as friendly. 
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Vice President, Law & Policy 
NeuStar, Inc. 
Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx 


 

From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 10:21 AM
To: KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> 
Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Subject: Re: AW: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS 
 

Thank you Wolf.

 

Jeff, Adrian, do you accept this amendment as friendly?

 

Stéphane

Le 6 janv. 2011 à 08:15, <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :





Following the discussion on the list I'd like to propose an amendment to the 
Alternate Motion on JAS (see attached) and would be happy if you accept it as 
friendly.

 

Wolf-Ulrich 
[WUK: ]  


  _____  


Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im 
Auftrag von Adrian Kinderis
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Januar 2011 00:45
An: Glen de Saint Géry; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS

 

I second this motion.

 

Adrian Kinderis




 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry
Sent: Thursday, 6 January 2011 9:28 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] RE: Alternate Motion on JAS

 

Forwarding the attached motions in word format .doc, easier to open than .docx

 

 

Glen de Saint Géry

GNSO Secretariat

gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://gnso.icann.org

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Liz Gasster
Sent: mercredi 5 janvier 2011 21:51
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Alternate Motion on JAS

 

Forwarding the attached motion from Jeff Neuman:  

 

 

From: owner-gnso-chairs@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-chairs@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 6:26 PM
To: gnso-chairs@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-chairs] Alternate Motion on JAS

 

All,

 

I am going on vacation, but I want to make sure that I do not miss the deadline 
to introduce motions for the January 13th Meeting.  So I would like to 
introduce this Motion as a completely new alternate motion.  Can I ask as a 
favor that unless you hear otherwise, can you please post this by the motion 
deadline?  I have attached a redlined version of my motion to the version 
proposed by Rafik for those on the Council that want to see what was done.

 

Thanks!

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman 
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 /  
<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx> jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx  /  
<http://www.neustar.biz/> www.neustar.biz     


  _____  


The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.

 

<JAS MOTION CLEAN_WUKamend.doc>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>