RE: [council] RE: Did we receive a briefing paper on the process for amendments to sTLD charters?

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

You are not going to get a disagreement from me that this paper is 
fundamentally flawed, but I am only conveying the answer I got when I asked the 
question back in March, that staff thought this paper addressed the particular 
resolution Kristina pointed to.

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: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 8:33 AM
To: Neuman, Jeff
Cc: krosette@xxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] RE: Did we receive a briefing paper on the process for 
amendments to sTLD charters?

Jeff,

That is not the briefing paper for amending sTLD charters. It refers
only to the new Community gTLDs. There are some similarities between
sTLDs and Community gTLDs, but there are major differences in their
structure and how they were/are allocated. IMO, amending a sTLD charter
is a fundamentally different issue than the Community gTLD Change
discussed in the paper you refer to.

Tim

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [council] RE: Did we receive a briefing paper on the process
> for amendments to sTLD charters?
> From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, September 29, 2011 5:04 pm
> To: "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>,
> "'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Kristina,
> Â
> A paper was posted on February 21, 2011 
> (http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/explantory-memo-community-change-request-21feb11-en.pdf);
>  which was heavily objected to on a number of grounds by the RySG.  In our 
> view, there were a number of flawed assumptions in there as well as too heavy 
> a hand by ICANN.Â
>
> I am not sure if someone from staff forwarded this to you, so I thought I 
> would and send it to the Council. Â At a few of the meetings, I brought this 
> up at the council level (in San Francisco in particular), but the Council did 
> not seem interested in taking it up at the time (or maybe they weren&#8217;t 
> paying attention J)
> Â
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
> Â
>
> Â
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 11:48 AM
> To: 'council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: [council] Did we receive a briefing paper on the process for 
> amendments to sTLD charters?
>
>
> Â
> Â
>
> All,
>
> Â
>
> I was just reading the BGC's December 9, 2010 recommendation on the .jobs 
> Charter Compliance Coalition reconsideration request and came across this 
> footnote on page 12:Â
>
> Â
>
> Â
>
> 4 The BGC also thinks that the Board should address the need for a process to 
> evaluate amendments that may have the effect of changing, or seeking to 
> change, an sTLD Charter or Stated Purpose of a sponsored, restricted or 
> community-based TLD. Because such a process may impact gTLDs greatly and is a 
> policy issue, the GNSO is the natural starting point for evaluating such a 
> process. We therefore further recommend that the Board direct the CEO to 
> create a briefing paper for the GNSO to consider on this matter, and for the 
> GNSO to determine whether a policy development process should be commenced.Â
>
> Â
>
> I don't recall receiving any such briefing paper.  Did we receive one?  If 
> so, would the relevant staff person mind sending me a copy of it?  Thanks!
>
> Â
>
> K
>
> Â
>
>
>