<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite"><font color="#000000"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">My personal opinion is that we also are free to ignore the GAC advice entirely, as the advice is directed to the Board. We can and should offer GNSO policy
advice on whatever track we believe is best, and then the Board can decide what to do with it.</span></font></blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
And if recent history is any judge, the Board will send our work back to us unless/until it aligns with the GAC initial position.</div>
<div><br>
Thank you,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>J.</div>
<div>____________</div>
<div>James Bladel</div>
<div>GoDaddy</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Oct 16, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Bret Fausett <<a href="mailto:bret@nic.sexy">bret@nic.sexy</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>I should also note that the GAC has opined on the work of the GNSO on new gTLDs, with this:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">"The review processes should be conducted and finalised before policy for the further gTLD rounds is developed and should include community-‐wide engagement on the issues of 6 communication
to and access by developing countries and regions, and all aspects of the framework for community-‐based gTLDs."</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is directly relevant to the work of the new gTLD discussion group. Note that they used the word “developed” and not “begun,” so I read this to say that we can begin our work, so long as we do not establish policy until that policy can take account
of the reports from the other review processes.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My personal opinion is that we also are free to ignore the GAC advice entirely, as the advice is directed to the Board. We can and should offer GNSO policy advice on whatever track we believe is best, and then the Board can decide what to do with it. I
don’t think we will need to reach that kind of confrontation, however, as I expect that the other review processes will complete well before the end of any PDP process that we initiate next year.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Bret</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div apple-content-edited="true">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
--<br>
Bret Fausett, Esq. • General Counsel, Uniregistry, Inc. <br>
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200 • Playa Vista, CA 90094-2536<br>
310-496-5755 (T) • 310-985-1351 (M) • <a href="mailto:bret@nic.sexy">bret@nic.sexy</a><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>