RE: [registrars] Registry Sensitive or Proprietary Information

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

John:

I think the repeated use of "I" (8X) in my original email should be rather
self evident that I was expressing my personal views. Although it is true
that I do occasional consulting work with a number of ICANN accredited
registrars, these were just my personal comments about a provision in the
registrar charter that is beyond ambiguous. In fact one might even submit
its definition is subject to unilateral change/interpretation much along the
same lines that some registrars change their registrant agreements to fit
their particular business models.

Although I had previously thought about responding to Rob Hall's post from a
couple of months ago regarding the origins of the "Registry Sensitive or
Proprietary Information", I was just too busy as of late.  However, it
seemed that I had some free time last evening while I was waiting for some
legal correspondence in connection with another client matter.

Hopefully these emails to you and Paul have resolved any
miscommunication/misperceptions.

Best regards,

Michael






-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Berryhill
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 4:06 AM
To: 'Michael D. Palage'; 'Paul Stahura'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: RE: [registrars] Registry Sensitive or Proprietary Information





>From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:Michael@xxxxxxxxxx]
>While I support your candidacy to the Non-Com, 

Mike, could you clarify the registrar on behalf of which your "support" is
posted to the RC list?