[ga] Vint on proposed .biz, .info and .org agreements

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

source: 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/pdp-pcceg-feb06/msg00370.html

To: Council GNSO
Subject: [council] Response from ICANN Board chair
with regard to the proposed .biz, .info and .org
agreements

From: Chair, ICANN Board
To:  GNSO Council


20 November 2006

To GNSO Council Members:

As we approach the meeting in Sao Paulo, I wanted to
briefly report to you on Board discussions that have
occurred during the past several months - especially
with regard to the proposed .biz, .info and .org
agreements.  I thought that a communication at this
point would useful given the amount of discussion that
is taking place in many quarters surrounding these
agreements, registry agreements in general and the
domain markets.

The Board has paid careful attention to the
discussions reported to us of the GNSO Council members
(and also among the constituency groups)
regarding the various gTLD agreements.  We have
followed the progress of the committee work on the PDP
that discusses the terms of registry agreements (the
"Feb 06 PDP") and also the work occurring on the PDP
for new gTLDs (including the term of reference having
to do with contractual terms).  The Board appreciates
that the GNSO is considering many complex
issues. Recognizing this, the Board asked staff to
fund expert financial analysis to examine the market
and answer questions such as whether a medium sized
registry such as .org or .info has monopoly power
under any practical definition.

We have also read all the community comment concerning
the recent registry agreements.  The Board has engaged
in many detailed discussions that carefully considered
exchanges on the council list and in on-line forums.

We have also read, considered carefully and debated
whether the GNSO resolution that the vote on these
latest registry agreements be postponed should be
adopted also as Board policy.

Our discussions lead me to a conclusion that a delay
in a vote is not justified by either a pending policy
development process or awaiting additional public
comment.  ICANN is compelled to implement a
Board-approved consensus policy but is also compelled
to carry on business as new policy is being developed.
 The timeline for approval of the pending agreements
cannot, in fairness to the parties, carry on up to the
last months of an existing agreement.  The process has
to conclude sometime before the termination date.

Given that the Board may vote against the presently
proposed agreement (and therefore additional time
might be required to settle the issue), a vote should
be taken as soon as the Board has the information it
feels is required and is ready to vote on the
proposals.

Having said that, there is no firm plan to taken a
vote at the 22 November meeting.  As you know, the
Board has scheduled and discussed the proposed
agreements at previous meetings.  At each meeting, in
response to Council and other discussion, the board
opted for additional time for consideration of comment
and discussion of the proposed agreements between the
parties and to allow further public comment to be
heard and considered.  As a result, there have been
changes made to the proposed agreements.  Votes are
not taken until there is a sense that the Board is
prepared to do so.  That sense is developed through
discussion on email lists and during meetings.

There may or may not be a vote on these agreements at
the upcoming meeting.

Neither outcome should be a surprise.  I wished to
write, however, to tell you that the Board (including
me) consider input from the Council carefully.  A
conclusion that differs from council member advice
does not indicate the Board "ignored" the advice.  The
Board receives inputs from many sources and these
inputs are frequently conflicting in their character. 
The Board is obligated to reach conclusions despite
variations in the recommendations it receives.  If the
Board conclusions differ from recommendations of the
GNSO, it will be a consequence of considering all
advice received including that of the GNSO Council.

The Board looks forward to the conclusion of the
Council's work on the very important PDPs now
underway.  Of course, the Board also continues
to be interested in your individual perspectives on
these issues.  Please let Denise Michel know if there
is any further information or support required.  She
will ensure that you are kept closely apprised of
our actions.

Sincerely,


Vint Cerf
ICANN Board Chair



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sponsored Link

Mortgage rates near 39yr lows. $510k for $1,698/mo. 
Calculate new payment! www.LowerMyBills.com/lre