<div dir="ltr">Hello,<div><br></div><div>we may offer other rewording that respond to Wolf-Ulrich remarks:</div><div><br></div><div>"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; ">c) Establishing a framework for consideration by the chartering organizations and the community at large that deals with methods where by any moneys raised for the purposes of support of new gTLD applicants. This framework could include a possible recommendation for a separate ICANN originated foundation. As the recommendations made by the Support for New gTLD Applicants also include a proposed use for surplus auction income, beyond costs. for future rounds and ongoing assistance, this framework could include a proposal for disposition of these fund, realizing however, the the use of surplus auction funds is a wider community topic and may include other proposals for the use of such funds."</span></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">what do you think?</span></font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">Regards</span></font></div>
<div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;"><br></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="arial, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;">Rafik<br>
</span></font><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/12/2 <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:KnobenW@telekom.de">KnobenW@telekom.de</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font> </div>
<div lang="de" dir="ltr" align="left"><font face="Tahoma" size="2"></font></div>
<div><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>All,</span></font></span></div>
<div><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span></span></font></span> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>I'd like to amend the "Motion for JAS WG charter
extension" as follows:</span></font></span></div>
<div><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span></span></font></span> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Remove "Resolved 1. c) Establishing a framework
(for consideration etcetera,) including a possible recommendation for a separate
ICANN originated foundation, for managing any auction income, beyond costs. for
future rounds and ongoing assistance;"</span></font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span></span></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Rationale: </span></font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><font face="Arial"><span><font size="2"><span></span></font></span><span></span></font> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">First, I'm convinced the community and ICANN have to be
prepared how to manage any potential new gTLD auction
profit.</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">As usual in case profit is available one can expect many interested
community groups expressing their needs to share that profit where new
applicants are one group of it. In addition parts of the overall ICANN program
could also profit from that fund (e.g. outreach program<span>, </span><span>DNS
security </span>etc.).</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">So my reservations to this topic being covered by the JAS group<span> only </span>are:</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">-
it is a too large area for the JAS and would go far beyond their originally
intended scope</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">-
there are lots of more urgent tasks for this WG as laid down in the new draft
charter. Handling the potential auction profit is of lower priority<span> on the timescale </span>.</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">-
as per definition the JAS view is applicant oriented that would cause an
imbalance</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2">As I pointed out in former e-mails the JAS could express the new
applicants' general interest in taking part in the distribution of the potential
auction profit.</font></span></div><span>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><br><font face="Arial"><font size="2">I suggest to initiate
discussion on council level how to cover this topic separately and
appropriately.<br><span><font color="#0000ff"> </font></span></font></font></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"></div></span><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span>I'm in agreement with all other items in the
charter<span> and woul</span></span><span>d be happy if <span>the
amendment</span> could be accepted <span>as
friendly </span>.</span></font></font></div>
<blockquote dir="ltr" style="margin-right:0px">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"><span>Save travels to
Cartagena</span></font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></span> </div>
<div><font face="Arial"><span lang="de"><font size="2">Wolf-Ulrich </font></span> </font></div>
<div> </div><br>
<blockquote dir="ltr" style="margin-right:0px">
<div lang="de" dir="ltr" align="left">
<hr>
<font face="Tahoma" size="2"><b>Von:</b> Rafik Dammak
[mailto:<a href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com" target="_blank">rafik.dammak@gmail.com</a>] <br><b>Gesendet:</b> Mittwoch, 1. Dezember
2010 20:58<br><b>An:</b> Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich<br><b>Betreff:</b> regarding
your amendment<br></font><br></div>
<div></div>
<div dir="ltr">Hi Wolf-Ulrich,
<div><br></div>
<div>regarding your comment last time about JAS motion, I would like to know
what are the reasons for asking to remove the 1.c . I think that we should
find a better and constructive compromise.what do you think?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Regards</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Rafik</div></div></blockquote></blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>