[bc-gnso] FW: PDP re Vertical Integration of Registrars & Registries

Berry Cobb berrycobb at infinityportals.com
Tue Feb 2 16:51:23 UTC 2010



Your reasoning statement in the GNSO call, and within the email string below
is spot on.  Policy or not on V.I., opening up the flood gates with an
estimated 500 new gTLDs may have enormous consequence.  We need to ensure a
change of this magnitude is adequately vetted.  


Thank you for your efforts.


Please add me to the volunteer list for the drafting team.



Berry A. Cobb

Infinity Portals LLC


From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Mike Rodenbaugh
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 07:38
To: BC List
Subject: [bc-gnso] FW: PDP re Vertical Integration of Registrars &


The GNSO Council has voted to move forward with a PDP on vertical

The Resolution is below. I introduced the original motion, which had been
drafted by Margie Milam of Staff. The text voted upon was written by Mary
Wong, and was accepted by me as a friendly amendment on the last day.  This
is consistent with the BC's position on this issue.  It is hoped that Staff
will agree with our position, that the 'status quo' should remain as in the
com/net/org contracts for the new TLD registry contracts, unless and until
policy is developed by the Council and adopted by the Board - rather than
imposed by Staff.  If so, then policy could develop to loosen the
restrictions later, or keep them the same.  If they loosen the restrictions
now, and later policy is developed or desired which would tighten them, then
it seemingly would be very difficult to implement.  That would be bad
precedent, and we won't know for years whether it is bad policy.

Notably, the entire Contracted Party House voted against a PDP.  I
understand that many are happy with the Staff recommendation for newTLDs,
and many fear delay to the new TLD program.  In our house, the vote was 11-2
in favor. The motion passed because it had more than 66% of votes in our
House in favor. (The ISPs were the two votes against.) Because of absentee
voting, the vote has just become final. 

I need to post by the 9th the names of any volunteers to the drafting team
that will draft the WG charter.  Please send me your name if you're
interested.  If no other volunteers, then I can work on the charter drafting
team, but we really need other volunteers to participate actively in the
Working Group that will be chartered to complete its work within sixteen
weeks.  So, please help if you can.




Whereas, on 24 September 2009, the GNSO Council requested ICANN Staff to
prepare an Issues Report on the topic of vertical integration between
registries and registrars;

Whereas, on 11 December 2009, the Issues Report on vertical integration
between registries and registrars was delivered to the GNSO Council;

Whereas, the Issues Report includes recommendations that the GNSO Council
delay the initiation of a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the issue for
a period of 1-2 years;

Whereas, notwithstanding the recommendations in the Issues Report, the GNSO
Council has decided to initiate a PDP on vertical integration between
registries and registrars; and

Whereas, the GNSO Council has decided against initiating a Task Force as
defined in the ICANN Bylaws;

Now therefore, be it:

RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council has reviewed the recommendations contained
in the Issues Report, and nonetheless approves the initiation of a PDP on
the topic of vertical integration between registries and registrars;

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the PDP shall evaluate which policy recommendations,
if any, should be developed on the topic of vertical integration between
registrars and registries affecting both new gTLDs and existing gTLDs, as
may be possible under existing contracts and as allowed under the ICANN

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the GNSO Council shall convene a Working Group to
fulfill the requirements of the PDP, including a review of ICANN Staff's
prior work with respect to vertical integration, and develop recommendations
accordingly; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Working Group shall deliver its Final Report to
the GNSO Council no later than sixteen weeks from the date of this



Mike Rodenbaugh


tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20100202/3cd82948/attachment.html>

More information about the Bc-gnso mailing list