RE: [registrars] ICANN Bylaws

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Ross,

Article XIX of the ICANN Bylaws state in relevant part that:

Except as otherwise provided in the Articles of Incorporation or these
Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of ICANN may be altered,
amended, or repealed and new Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws adopted
only upon action by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of all members of the Board.

Therefore, I fully agree with your initial comment that more than just GNSO
support is needed. However, similar to the changes in the ICANN bylaws
regarding the number of GNSO representatives per constituency (2 v. 3), the
GNSO council did specifically make a recommendation to the Board on this
proposed bylaw change.

I hope this helps and please keep informed of how I can be of any assistance
in this matter.

Best regards,

Michael D. Palage




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Ross Rader
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 12:27 PM
To: jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] ICANN Bylaws


What is the proposed mechanism for making these changes? We may need more
than just GNSO support.

-----Original Message-----
    From: "Nevett, Jonathon"<jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    Sent: 01/08/05 12:03:51 PM
    To: "Bruce Tonkin"<Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Registrars
Constituency"<registrars@xxxxxxxx>
    Subject: RE: [registrars] ICANN Bylaws
      Bruce/Ross/Tom:  Would you seek GNSO support for these changes to the
    ICANN Bylaws?  Thanks.  Jon

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
    Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 2:43 AM
    To: Registrars Constituency
    Subject: RE: [registrars] ICANN Bylaws


    Hello Jon,

    > Attached is a redline of changes to two sections of the ICANN Bylaws
    that Network
    > Solutions is pursuing with the ICANN Board to address the breach of
    trust
    > surrounding the .net contract approval process.  Any support would be
    appreciated.

    I support the proposed changes.

    In addition you may want to add some language that requires ICANN to
    explain the reasons for changes to standard form agreements such as the
    Registrars Accreditation Agreement (RAA), and the ICANN registry
    agreements.   Changes to these standard agreements affects many
    contracts into the future.

    What has happened recently is that the standard registry agreement that
    has been signed by new operators (e.g .jobs, .travel) as well as .net,
    has been changed.   Most of us did not realize that the agreements being
    signed by the new sponsored gtld operators had changed from the
    agreements previously signed by operators such as .museum, .biz etc.   I
    believe that the proposed sponsored agreements had been posted, but none
    of us (that I know of) knew of the significant changes.  I would have
    assumed that they would have signed the same standard agreement as .biz,
    .museum etc, with some appendices that were customised for the
    particular TLD.


    e.g replace:
    "1. With respect to any policies or contracts that are being considered
    by the Board for adoption or approval that substantially affect the
    operation of the Internet or third parties, including the imposition of
    any fees or charges, ICANN shall:

    a. provide public notice on the Website explaining what policies or
    contracts are being considered for adoption or approval and why, at
    least twenty-one days (and if practical, earlier) prior to any action by
    the Board; "

    With
    "1. With respect to any policies or contracts that are being considered
    by the Board for adoption or approval that substantially affect the
    operation of the Internet or third parties, including the imposition of
    any fees or charges, ICANN shall:

    a. provide public notice on the Website explaining what policies or
    contracts are being considered for adoption or approval and why
    (including an explanation of the reasons for any changes to the standard
    terms of contracts such as registry or registrar agreements), at least
    twenty-one days (and if practical, earlier) prior to any action by the
    Board; "

    I have added the text "(including an explanation of the reasons for any
    changes to the standard terms of contracts such as registry or registrar
    agreements)".


    Regards,
    Bruce Tonkin