<html>
<body>
I have no rights to amend the motion, but I would like to suggest the
following amendment if anyone else is prepared to formally propose
it.<br><br>
The rationale is that it is now reasonably clear that:<br>
- There may be requests to widen the concept to other international
organizations;<br>
- There have been recommendations that any such changes not mention
particular organizations but be more generic;<br>
- There is concern in the community over the overall concept;<br>
- There is concern in the community about making permanent the Board Name
reservation which did not have bottom-up input of community
involvement.<br><br>
<b>Replace:<br><br>
</b>Recommendation 3: Protections should apply for all
future rounds, but may be reviewed after the first round.<br><br>
In its
proposal, the GAC has recommended that the protections for the IOC and
RCRC should not just apply during the first round of new gTLDs, but
should be a permanent protection afforded for all subsequent
rounds. Although, the Drafting Team has not spent a lot of time
discussing this topic, it does agree with the notion that it is making
this recommendation as one intended to apply in all future rounds, but
also recognizes that like all other aspects of the new gTLD program,
these protections may be reviewed by the ICANN community should it desire
to do so.<br><br>
<b>With:<br><br>
</b>Recommendation 3: Protections should apply to the first
round only.<br><br>
In
light of the possible need to consider other international organizations
or make the above recommendations more generic, and light of unease in
parts of the committee, it is recommended that the above changes to the
Applicant Guidebook apply to the first round only.<br><br>
<br>
Alan<br><br>
<br>
At 26/03/2012 08:42 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">All,<br>
<br>
The Drafting Team discussed possible amendments to the IOC/RCRC motion
last week during its regularly scheduled meeting. I am not sure if
those will be proposed or not by some members of the Council, so I guess
we will just wait and see. There are two changes I would like to
see which is more of clean-up administrative changes. Because of
(i) the discussions in Costa Rica where changes were made to
recommendation 2 to limit the number of languages as opposed to the
version proposed on March 2<sup>nd</sup>, and (ii) the Board already met
on March 16<sup>th</sup>, I propose making the following
changes:<br>
<br>
<u>First Resolved Clause<br>
</u>Resolved, that the GNSO Council adopts the <u>following three
recommendations from the </u>IOC/RC Drafting Team<s>’s three
recommendations as described in its Proposal for the protection of IOC
and RCRC names at the top level as provided in
<a href="http://gnso.icann.org/issues/ioc-rcrc-proposal-02mar12-en.pdf">
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/ioc-rcrc-proposal-02mar12-en.pdf</a>;
namely</s>:<br>
<br>
<u>Last Resolved Clause<br>
</u>Resolved, that the GNSO submits this proposed solution for Board
consideration and adoption at its <s>16 March 2012</s> <u>next
</u>meeting <s>in Costa Rica</s> as a recommended solution to implement
Board Resolution 2011.06.20.01 for implementation in the first round of
new gTLD applications.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<u> <br>
</u><b>Jeffrey J. Neuman <br>
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs</b><br>
21575 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, VA 20166<br>
<b>Office: </b>+1.571.434.5772 <b>Mobile: </b>+1.202.549.5079
<b>Fax: </b>+1.703.738.7965 <b>/</b>
<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@neustar.biz">jeff.neuman@neustar.biz</a>
<b>/</b>
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz/" eudora="autourl">www.neustar.biz</a>
<br>
</blockquote></body>
</html>