<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7036.0">
<TITLE>GNSO Issues Report: .COM Agreement</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<BR>
<P><B><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Council,</FONT></SPAN></B>
<BR><B><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">A few personal reflections on the GC's advice to us.</FONT></SPAN></B><SPAN LANG="fr-be"></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">The issues report on dot com cont</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">a</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">ins general counsel's (GC) a</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">d</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">vi</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">c</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">e on scope.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> The GC concludes we are out of scope</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> but I find the reasoning overly narrow.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">The GC considered the PDP scope article:</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">1. is within the scope of ICANN's mission statement;</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">2. is broadly applicable to multiple situations or organizations;</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">3. is likely to have lasting value or applicability, albeit with the need for</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">occasional updates;</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">4. will establish a guide or framework for future decision-making; or</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">5. implicates or affects an existing ICANN policy.”</FONT></SPAN>
</P>
<P><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">And the GC states:</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">a) any such issues resulting from this request are specifically targeting the 2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Proposed .COM Registry Agreement, and therefore such policies do not apply to</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">multiple situations or organizations</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">;</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Surely illogical. The essence of the GNSO concern is that GNSO consensus policy which is "broadly applicable to multiple situations or organisations" has been REMOVED from the specific proposed agreement.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT> </SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">b) any such issues resulting from this request are specifically targeting the 2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Proposed .COM Registry Agreement will not have lasting value or applicability,</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">particularly where that agreement has already been supplanted by the 2006</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Proposed .COM Registry</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> (Agreement)</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">;</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Surely irrelevant. This would be relevant if the character of the 2006 agreement was a radical shift from the 2005 agreement. IT IS NOT!</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">c) any such issues resulting from this request are specifically targeting the 2005</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Proposed .COM Registry Agreement are unlikely to provide a guide or</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">framework for future decisions making, particularly as in this case where the</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">proposed version of the agreement for which the comments have been raised has</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">already been supplanted and amended (where possible) in response to the</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"> <FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">community feedback.</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">"</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Surely i</FONT><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">rrelevant. The issues of concern to the GNSO have been raised in community feedback and ignored.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-gb"></SPAN>
</P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">The issues report quotes Council's December resolution for which a key recital is:</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2 FACE="TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT">"Whereas the GNSO Council believes that there are broader questions raised in the proposed settlement that need to be first addressed by the GNSO";</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">It was this resolution which underpins Council's request for an issues report. </FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">The issues report </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">seems to</FONT> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">circumvents the </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">pertinent</FONT> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">issues:</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">a) that existing and binding ICANN consensus policy is being ignored in the proposed Agreement,</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">b) and the precedence this sets,</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">c) the precedent set for other issues.</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">-</FONT></SPAN>
<BR><SPAN LANG="fr-be"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">This issues report disappoints.</FONT></SPAN>
</P>
<BR>
<P><SPAN LANG="en-gb"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Philip</FONT></SPAN>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>