Re: [council] RE: [council] RE: [council] GAC Communiqué f rom Toronto

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed. The GAC position is that the names cannot be used.

As Jeff has repeatedly said, the USE of these 
names may be forbidden, but so is the use of 
certain words in certain countries. If we expect 
all registries to deny registrations of these 
names, they must be explicitly listed in the contracts.
Historically the reserved names list has been 
changed without the benefit of a PDP - compare:
http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/verisign/appendix-06-01mar06-en.htm 
and
http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/registries/verisign/registry-agmt-appk-com-16apr01-en.htm. 
I am not sure if these changes were all the 
result of Board action, or simply staff action. 
In any case, we need to NOT say that a PDP is 
required for any change of that list. History 
says otherwise. And in my mind, there is no 
reason to believe that this is still not the case.
However, given the likelihood (already 
experienced) of others saying "me too", a formal 
PDP is warranted. The fact that the GAC is 
willing to create a specific list (something I 
suggested a while ago and was told the GAC would 
*never* agree to do such operational work) makes 
it implementable if the PDP should decide that reservation is warranted.
Alan




At 21/10/2012 07:30 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> I will help with this one.  My explanation 
> during the Council meeting and then again during 
> the public forum should be of some assistance here.
> Best regards,
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
>
> Sent from iPad.  Please excuse any typos.
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:   Sunday, October 21, 2012 06:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
> To:     'Bruce Tonkin'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:        [council] RE: [council] GAC Communiqué from Toronto
>
>
> All,
>
> Please be particularly aware of the paragraphs in Section IV, item 3 on page
> 5 including the following:
>
> "The GAC will seek clarification from the GNSO as to its rationale for
> initiating a PDP."
>
> Jonathan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
> Sent: 21 October 2012 01:18
> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [council] GAC Communiqué from Toronto
>
> Hello All,
>
> Attached for information is the GAC Communiqué from Toronto.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin