[bc-gnso] RE: FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on GAC Advice on safeguards for new gTLDs

Wed May 29 15:35:24 UTC 2013

Dear all,

As we are soon closing the final comments on the GAC Advice, I gave the
document (which I hope is the latest iteration) one more read and noticed
some redundancy and conflicting statements on 'applicable law' as referenced
several times throughout the BC response.  The attached edits are an attempt
to harmonize that language in a more uniform approach.

I would also like to note that I support the edits proposed by Sarah et al
with regard to closed generics that is also found in this iteration of the
BC response.

With respect to one of Andy's comments (email from yesterday, Tuesday) to
wit:

*	"Safeguards Applicable to All New gTLDs": To the extent new
safeguards are implemented for all new gTLDs, we respectfully believe there
is merit to discussing a PDP in order to apply such safeguards to all gTLDs.
As set forth in this section, we agree that wide discrepancies in
implementation of safeguards are not ideal for registrants and Internet
users - we believe that this statement should apply to gTLDs generally, not
simply to new gTLDs. 

Asking the community for a PDP related to GAC Advice on safeguards - at this
late stage in the game - holds the potential to throw the whole gTLD program
into disarray.  While I agree in principle that safeguards should apply to
all gTLDs, I also agree that all gTLDs should all be thick registries. We
all know where that PDP went.  .COM remains a thin registry.  In my view,
such a call would put the safeguards in standstill and the BC would
effectively be seen as poking the GAC in the eye.  While I believe that many
in the BC agree that all gTLDs should be operating on the same basic
principles, the timing for this is just not right at the moment.

Hope this helps.

Kind regards,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA <http://www.rnapartners.com>  Partners, Inc.

  _____  

From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Deutsch, Sarah B
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:58 PM
To: Elisa Cooper; Steve DelBianco
Cc: bc-gnso at icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on GAC Advice on
safeguards for new gTLDs

All,

To follow up on our BC call this morning,  we discussed why the existing
draft asking ICANN to develop a non-specific public policy exemption in the
Registry Code of Conduct for closed generics was not a good idea.  Steve had
encouraged me, J. Scott Evans and Laura Covington from Yahoo to put pen to
paper and propose specific ideas (building on the Australia's earlier GAC
recommendations on closed generics) rather than for the BC to remain silent
on this issue.  

Our proposed language is attached for Members' consideration.

Sarah

Sarah B. Deutsch 
Vice President & Deputy General Counsel 
Verizon Communications 
Phone: 703-351-3044 
Fax: 703-351-3670 

From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Elisa Cooper
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 3:34 PM
To: Steve DelBianco
Cc: bc-gnso at icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on GAC Advice on
safeguards for new gTLDs

Steve,

Thank you so much for all of your work on this.

Please find attached my edits to Sarah's draft.

As previously stated, I will recuse myself from comments related to Closed
Generics. That said, I am concerned that the proposed comments in this draft
may be at odds with our earlier position:
http://www.bizconst.org/Positions-Statements/BC%20Comment%20on%20Closed%20Ge
neric%20TLDs.pdf.

Thank you again.

Best,

Elisa

Elisa Cooper

Director of Product Marketing

MarkMonitor

Elisa Cooper

Chair 

ICANN Business Constituency

208 389-5779 PH

From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Deutsch, Sarah B
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 12:29 PM
To: Steve DelBianco; bc-gnso at icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] RE: FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on GAC Advice on
safeguards for new gTLDs

Steve, All,

Thanks for your work on this draft. My comments are attached.   One big
issue I would flag for members is the paragraph dealing with closed
generics.   Various BC members have grave concerns about certain closed
generics and formal objections have been filed.  The focus on applying for
an exemption in the Final Guidebook does not fix these fundamental concerns
for the reasons outlined in the attached. 

I'd suggest that the BC either (a) refrain from taking a position on the
closed generic issue altogether or (b) support the GAC's concerns about
closed generics and the need to show that an award of an exclusive right in
a generic term is in the larger public interest.   

Sarah

From: owner-bc-gnso at icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso at icann.org] On Behalf Of
Steve DelBianco
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 4:40 PM
To: bc-gnso at icann.org
Subject: [bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on GAC Advice on safeguards
for new gTLDs

ICANN's new gTLD Board Committee has requested public comment on how it
should address GAC advice to establish safeguards for categories of new
gTLDs. (link
<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/gac-safeguard-advice-23apr13-en
.htm> )

The BC has have held 3 conference calls on this topic (see minutes and
transcripts on the BC Wiki <https://community.icann.org/display/gnsobc/Home>
).  Several BC members provided input, including text from Ron Andruff,
Marilyn Cade, and Andrew Mack.  

Comment period closes 4-Jun.   That allows our regular 14-day review and
approval period.  So, please REPLY ALL with your suggested edits and
comments regarding this draft, before 29-May-2013.

Steve DelBianco

Vice chair for policy coordination

Business Constituency

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130529/a9958bb5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: BC Comment on GAC Advice for new gTLDs DRAFT v1sd2-ra1.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 158311 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bc-gnso/attachments/20130529/a9958bb5/BCCommentonGACAdvicefornewgTLDsDRAFTv1sd2-ra1.docx>