<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">I also think Becky's revision improves the language:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14px">“</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14px;color:blue">While acknowledging that ICANN <s>does not possess</s> is not an antitrust <s>expertise or</s> authority, on balance the CCWG elected to retain the introductory language to ensure that ICANN continues to have the authority, for example, to refer competition-related questions regarding new registry services to APPROPRIATE authorities under the RSEP program and to establish bottom-up policies for allocating top-level domains (e.g., auction rules, community preferences, etc.).”</span><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14px;color:blue"><br></span></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif">Thank you for clarifying the RSEP reference. I'm still not convinced that referring competition-related questions to the appropriate authorities is at odds with relying on market mechanisms, but I'm not going to die in a ditch over it. (I think the preliminary determination of competition issues might be, but no need to gild the lily -- these are only examples.)</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif">I would prefer to change "competent" to "appropriate" to track the language in the RSEP, and because "competent" is one of those funny words with different meanings ("a court of competent jurisdiction" just means the appropriate court and is not a comment on whether they are a bunch of incompetents, while "competent" in other contexts is very much linked to their level of expertise and skill). I have made this change above</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif">I'll also freely admit that I'm no economist, and it seems that even in economic circles, the term "market mechanisms" is not so easy to define. In the interests of not beating a dead horse, I can live with this language, preferably with my small change. </font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font color="#000000" face="verdana, sans-serif">Greg</font></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Much better Becky. But I still don´t understand the first (negative) part of the sentence up to the first comma. Would´t it be possible to assert that ICANN recognises its responsibility (trough AoC type of Review commitments), while not being an authority to solve conflicts on competition issues…….<br>
<br>
Best<span class=""><br>
<br>
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez<br>
<a href="tel:%2B506%208837%207176" value="+50688377176" target="_blank">+506 8837 7176</a><br>
Skype: carlos.raulg<br></span><span class="">
On 1 Feb 2016, at 11:34, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
Yes, this appears to be semantic, but I’m not sure we are moving the ball forward by asserting that “my” (or “your”) definition of a term is “the” definition. For example, I would say an auction is fundamentally a “market mechanism” and since you cannot have an auction without having auction rules, those rules are also “market mechanisms.” This distinguishes them from the kind of “command and control” “thou shalt not” authority that sovereign regulators possess – and that IMHO, ICANN does not.<br>
<br>
I’m beginning to feel that no one is willing to compromise, but I’ll give it another try. How about:<br>
<br>
<br>
“While acknowledging that ICANN does not possess is not an antitrust expertise or authority, on balance the CCWG elected to retain the introductory language to ensure that ICANN continues to have the authority, for example, to refer competition-related questions regarding new registry services to competent authorities under the RSEP program and to establish bottom-up policies for allocating top-level domains (e.g., auction rules, community preferences, etc.).”<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br></span>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+1.202.533.2932</a> Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> / <a href="http://neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">neustar.biz</a><<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
<br>
From: Greg Shatan <<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com" target="_blank">gregshatanipc@gmail.com</a>>><span class=""><br>
Date: Monday, February 1, 2016 at 2:05 PM<br></span>
To: Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>>><br>
Cc: "Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a>>>, cct-review <<a href="mailto:cct-review@icann.org" target="_blank">cct-review@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:cct-review@icann.org" target="_blank">cct-review@icann.org</a>>>, Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>><span class=""><br>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "feasible and appropriate" reliance on market mechanisms<br>
<br>
Carlos and Becky,<br>
<br></span><span class="">
I think this is a semantic issue. Relying on market mechanisms essentially means taking a "hands-off" position with regard to the market. Under this approach, the market is allowed to define itself and to use such "market mechanisms" as supply and demand. It does not mean the opposite (having an entity exercise control over the market through timing, availability, objection proceedings, approval of potential buyers, etc.).<br>
<br>
If ICANN relied solely on market mechanisms, the AGB would be 20 pages long and you could walk up to the window today and buy .piru (and so could I). (That might be an exaggeration...)<br>
<br>
Everything that ICANN does to define the market, to control entry into the market, to define how the market works, to introduce reservation, objection and protection processes, etc., is a step away from relying on "market mechanisms."<br>
<br>
I'm sure there are economists and others who can define this better than me....<br>
<br>
Greg<br>
<br></span><span class="">
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Burr, Becky <<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>>> wrote:<br>
I am sorry that you have seriously misunderstood my comment. I am a<br>
strong advocate for ICANN relying on market mechanisms to increase<br>
competition, and I believe that should be very clear from my comment.<br>
ICANN is not an anti-trust authority. That is simply a statement of fact.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br></span><span class="">
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy<br>
General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br></span>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+1.202.533.2932</a><tel:%2B1.202.533.2932> Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a><tel:%2B1.202.352.6367> / <a href="http://neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">neustar.biz</a><<a href="http://neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://neustar.biz</a>><br>
<<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2/1/16, 12:59 PM, "Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez G." <<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
Dear Becky,<br>
<br>
after signing the AoC in 2008 as a step toward a new round, going trough<br>
a round of new gTLDs charging rather high applicant fees (or at least<br>
high enough so as to create barriers to entry for underserved areas) and<br>
solving competing applications trough pure actions, creating a new GDD<br>
and greatly increasing the name space, arguing that ICANN does not rely<br>
on market mechanisms or does not posses the necessary knowledge in the<br>
implications of competition, is an understatement I can hardly believe<br>
in February 2016. Hope the CCT reviews will give us all a more realistic<br>
view.<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
<br>
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez<br>
</span><a href="tel:%2B506%208837%207176" value="+50688377176" target="_blank">+506 8837 7176</a><tel:%2B506%208837%207176><span class=""><br>
Skype: carlos.raulg<br>
On 29 Jan 2016, at 11:49, Burr, Becky wrote:<br>
<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
All -<br>
<br>
As a follow up to our call on Tuesday regarding the language for Core<br>
Value 5/4: The language in the current Bylaws reads as follows:<br>
<br>
Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to<br>
promote and sustain a competitive environment.<br>
<br>
The CCWG dropped the introductory ³where feasible and appropriate²<br>
when we issued the 1rst Draft Proposal. The ALAC, and now some<br>
additional members/participants, have objected to that change. I<br>
objected to the reinsertion of that language.<br>
<br>
Based on our call on Tuesday I would characterize the mood as follows:<br>
<br>
<br>
* Most folks are indifferent<br>
* Some folks feel very strongly that it is very important to retain<br>
the ³where feasible and appropriate²<br>
* Some folks would probably prefer to drop the language, but no one<br>
feels as strongly as I do about it<br>
<br>
I would propose to resolve the situation by reverting the existing<br>
Bylaws language and adding the following language to the explanatory<br>
text of Recommendation 5:<br>
<br></span>
While acknowledging that ICANN does not possess antitrust expertise or<span class=""><br>
authority, on balance the CCWG elected to retain the introductory<br>
language to ensure that ICANN continues to have the authority, for<br>
example, to refer competition-related questions regarding new registry<br></span>
services to competent authorities under the RSEP program, to establish<br>
bottom-up policies for allocating top-level domains (e.g., community<br>
preference), etc.<br>
<br>
Thoughts?<span class=""><br>
<br>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
Office: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" value="+12025332932" target="_blank">+1.202.533.2932</a> Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" value="+12023526367" target="_blank">+1.202.352.6367</a> /<br>
</span><a href="http://neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">neustar.biz</a><<a href="http://neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://neustar.biz</a>><<a href="http://www.neustar.biz" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.neustar.biz</a>><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>><span class=""><br>
<br>
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman</a><br>
_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwIDaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_<br>
lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=vxemPO-I_e47KeqKFnc<br>
vv3fG9osjfWABNnfdCgTavbQ&s=RPsVggwEO04zEac-Gzt4MRtRpg-g1-85yYxF_K2z9Wc&e=<br>
<br>
</span></blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a>><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=JcHS0rBaiXEt16qYdnq4aLvvBL7k3CBphYI_hj0LJjI&s=8kn-NCoyz0EfgyMEJBIdsjuKr6Kmz59fWGa9NlKV6pI&e=" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=JcHS0rBaiXEt16qYdnq4aLvvBL7k3CBphYI_hj0LJjI&s=8kn-NCoyz0EfgyMEJBIdsjuKr6Kmz59fWGa9NlKV6pI&e=</a>><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br></div>