ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

[ga] A Concrete "Thin Contract" Proposal

  • To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [ga] A Concrete "Thin Contract" Proposal
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:47:59 -0800 (PST)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=wZ+o8ciYJlxwVdR+msrM3TTWKJ5xWDwMveCxlECI6xoFMbRTOQ8CkE9vsNGYP36CkD3WwGT2s33Rc5Lla2qvA1p6s++53TtbfSuTD636Ds/hUEQvvR1kODDRg8Q8K9WRTLJPk9tXZOlSD3WRzcP+tT0RvN8wsYiMB649ztSr8cY= ;
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In August of 2003 David Johnson and Susan Crawford
(now a Board member) put forward a great contribution
entitled, "A Concrete "Thin Contract" Proposal" that
called for a substantially thinner contract for use by
ICANN and the registries.  ICANN seems to be moving in
this direction (at least in view of what we saw in the
proposed .com registry agreement). I like some of
their proposed policies, such as "The maximum price
charged by Registry Operator for renewal registrations
may not exceed the pricing for initial registrations."
 Their document (complete with a model registry
contract) is well worth reading:

http://forum.icann.org/mtg-cmts/stld-rfp-comments/general/msg00039.html

 





	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. 
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>