[CWG-Stewardship] FW: [client com] IPR Memo

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 09:41:58PM +0000, David Conrad wrote:
> If we assume "the numbers community" has decided to extract themselves
> from the use of the ICANN-operated IANA Numbering function, how exactly
> would ICANN refusing to give up IANA.ORG (which is FAR more operationally
> used by the IETF community and less so by the naming community) or the
> IANA trademarks have any impact on "the numbers community" at all?

If you read the proposal, they seem to believe that this is an issue.
I quoted the relevant text.  I cannot pretend to be in the minds of
others, so I can't tell you why people might feel this way.  But that
is the claim as far as I can tell.  It seems to me that if one had
wanted to dispute the claim, the time to have done that would have
been when the proposal was being put together, rather than now when
the other communities have been silent on the topic and the ICG has
concluded that the whole proposal only hangs together if the other
communities somehow agree to an arrangement that fits the names
community's proposal requirements.

> What am I missing?

You may not be missing anything now, but I think you may have missed
your opportunity to talk the numbers community out of setting the
requirement.  It's now a part of the combined proposal from the ICG;
if we don't find some way to accommodate it, then, according to the
ICG's own discussion near the beginning of the document, the proposal
will not hold together.  If that happens, the process is that the ICG
sends the whole thing back to the relevant communities and we don't
get the proposal done in time for Dublin.  And then we don't get a
transition, because there won't be time.  I hope it is evident to
everyone that having this fall apart over a domain name would be
something of a bitter irony.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com