RE: [council] Agenda for ICANN Board Meeting, 21 April 2011

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Does that mean existing Registries get to hand pick which clauses they want to 
take on from the new Agreements??

When the 2009 RAA was finalized, Registrars had the option of riding out the 
term of their existing RAA or signing on to the new (2009) RAA. They did not 
have the option of selecting those terms & conditions they wanted from each 
Agreement (existing RAA and 2009 RAA). I would expect to see similar treatment 
for Registries.

Adrian Kinderis
Chief Executive Officer
AusRegistry International Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: www.ausregistry.com

- Follow AusRegistry International on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ausregistryint 

The information contained in this communication is intended for the named 
recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged 
and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must 
not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have 
received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system 
and notify us immediately.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent: Monday, 18 April 2011 8:53 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Agenda for ICANN Board Meeting, 21 April 2011


Hello Stéphane,

> 
> Can you elaborate a little on what agenda item 15 will cover please?
> 
> 
>  15. Review of Vertical Integration for Existing gTLD Registry
> Operators

on 5 Nov 2010, the Board resolution related to vertical integration 
(http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-05nov10-en.htm) stated:

" 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."

Since then some existing registry operators have inquired about the process for 
removing cross-ownership provisions in their agreements.

So I would expect a discussion on next steps at the Board meeting.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin