[bc-gnso] NetChoice comment on IANA

Mike Roberts mmr at darwin.ptvy.ca.us
Sat Apr 2 14:54:47 UTC 2011

Steve -

I think this is a misinterpretation of the ICANN 
letter.  What I read says to replace the contract 
with a cooperative agreement.

This is a good idea and the BC should support. 
It is entirely consistent with regular reviews, 
ATRT, etc.

The "evil" procurement style contract was foisted 
on a very unwilling ICANN CEO and Board in late 
98 by DOD/NTIA lawyers covering their backs.  As 
ICANN says, it makes no sense.  This is not a 
procurement situation, it is basically a public 
service/public trust effort, which a cooperative 
agreement is designed to support.

- Mike

At 1:33 PM +0000 4/1/11, Steve DelBianco wrote:
>Just sharing the NetChoice comment on IANA (attached).
>We took a different tack than ETNO, because we 
>are concerned about ICANN's 'commitment' to the 
>Affirmation of Commitments.
>Before responding to specific questions in the 
>RfC, we address the comment filed by ICANN on 
>March 25, arguing to remove Commerce Department 
>review of IANA function performance.  For 
>reasons explained below, we believe that 
>Commerce must retain regular IANA contract 
>reviews in order to hold ICANN to its 
>Affirmation of Commitments.
>Steve DelBianco
>Executive Director
>http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
>Content-Type: application/x-msword; name="NetChoice on IANA Contract.pdf"
>Content-Description: NetChoice on IANA Contract.pdf
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NetChoice on IANA Contract.pdf";
>	size=116715; creation-date="Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:35:18 GMT";
>	modification-date="Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:35:18 GMT"
>Content-ID: <a652597f-e692-4cfa-a36b-009716c26ae6>
>Attachment converted: HD 500:NetChoice on IANA 
>Contract.pdf (PDF /«IC») (0118ECC9)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20110402/f4576722/attachment.html>

More information about the Bc-gnso mailing list