<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>I'd agree with Mike in this case. It's the model that many Big brands are considering. <br><br>Sent from +1(415)606-3733</div><div><br>On Aug 10, 2010, at 9:53 AM, "Mike Rodenbaugh" <<a href="mailto:icann@rodenbaugh.com">icann@rodenbaugh.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">I disagree that Single Registrant – Multiple User models
have no support in the WG. To the contrary, those models would be freely
allowed under the “free trade” proposals that have garnered a lot
of support in the WG – in fact receiving more support than either of the
other major alternatives in the last straw poll of the WG. More
importantly to our Members, such models may very well be desirable for many
businesses who wish to own and operate a new gTLD, and so we should support
that flexibility as there does not appear to be any additional or substantial harm
that would be caused by those business models.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">Mike Rodenbaugh<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">RODENBAUGH LAW<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D">tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"><a href="http://rodenbaugh.com/"><span style="color:blue">http://rodenbaugh.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org">owner-bc-gnso@icann.org</a> [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ron
Andruff<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 09, 2010 12:34 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Steve DelBianco'; 'bc - GNSO list'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [bc-gnso] Proposed BC Comment on Vertical Integration
Working Group Initial Report (to be filed 12-Aug)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">Steve,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">Thanks
for the updated comments. I have made a couple of edits/comments, as
noted in the attached draft. I specifically commented on the Single
Registrant Multiple User (SRMU), which has not gotten any traction, rather only
push back from the broader working group. The BC should take note of this
and perhaps modify its language in this regard.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">Thanks.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">Kind
regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">RA<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">Ronald N. Andruff</span><span style="color:blue"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">President<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:blue"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">RNA Partners, Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">220 </span><span style="font-size:10.0pt"><ns0:street w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><ns0:address w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">Fifth Avenue</span><span class="msoIns"><ins cite="mailto:Owner" datetime="2010-08-09T15:30"></ins></span></ns0:address></ns0:street></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt"><ns0:place w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><ns0:city w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">New York</span><span class="msoIns"><ins cite="mailto:Owner" datetime="2010-08-09T15:30"></ins></span></ns0:city></ns0:place></span><span style="font-family:
"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue">, </span><ns0:state w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">New York</span><span class="msoIns"><ins cite="mailto:Owner" datetime="2010-08-09T15:30"></ins></span></ns0:state><span style="font-family:
"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"> </span><ns0:postalcode w:insauthor="Owner" w:insdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z" w:endinsauthor="Owner" w:endinsdate="2010-08-09T15:30:00Z"><span style="font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">10001</span><span class="msoIns"><ins cite="mailto:Owner" datetime="2010-08-09T15:30"></ins></span></ns0:postalcode><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue">+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span style="color:blue"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org">owner-bc-gnso@icann.org</a> [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Steve
DelBianco<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, August 06, 2010 1:24 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'bc - GNSO list'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [bc-gnso] Proposed BC Comment on Vertical Integration Working
Group Initial Report (to be filed 12-Aug)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">To:
BC members<br>
From: BC executive committee<br>
<br>
On Thursday 5-Aug, your executive committee held a call with several BC members
who are devoting much of their time to the Vertical Integration (VI) Working
Group. ( Ron Andruff, Berry Cobb, Mike Palage, and Jon Nevett ) <br>
<br>
The discussion revealed that the Working Group is not likely to reach consensus
for any single plan. However, there are principles which may emerge with
significant support. The initial report of the Working Group is
presently posted for public comment, with a due date of 12-Aug. (see <a href="http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#vi-pdp-initial-report"><a href="http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#vi-pdp-initial-report">http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#vi-pdp-initial-report</a></a>
)<br>
<br>
The BC already has an approved position on VI, which was posted in Sep-2009.
However, we believe that the BC needs to make key clarifications of
our Sep-2009 position in order to make it more relevant the VI Working
Group’s initial draft report:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">1. define what the BC
meant by “status quo” in our statement “the BC opposes any
change to the status quo for all TLDs intended for sale to third parties”<br>
<br>
2. define what the BC meant by “internal use” in our
statement “The BC believes that uniquely for domain names intended for internal
use, the principle of registry-registrar vertical separation should be
waived.”<br>
<br>
3. encourage continued work to define eligibility and scope for Single
registrant – Single User exception. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><br>
We drafted a comment along these lines and have posted it here for your review
and comment. The executive committee plans to file these comments by
12-August deadline. (comment attached)<br>
<br>
Again, these are meant to be clarifications of existing position — not a
new comment that would be subject to the 14-day review period required by our
charter. <br>
<br>
But as you review these comments, please feel free to raise new issues that go
beyond clarifying our Sep-2009 position, since your thoughts will be extremely
helpful to the BC members on this working Group and to our GNSO Councilors.
For example, please think about how to distinguish
‘registered users’ of a dot-brand owner from
‘registrants’ of an ICANN-accredited registrar. <br>
<br>
<br>
--Steve DelBianco</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div></blockquote></body></html>