<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
    Hi,<br>
    <br>
    Did my comments not reach the list?<br>
    <br>
    avri<br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04-May-15 10:26, Jen Wolfe wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:BY1PR0601MB120587C94808C60276BEB720DFD20@BY1PR0601MB1205.namprd06.prod.outlook.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=windows-1252">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
        {font-family:Wingdings;
        panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Verdana;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Tahoma;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:#0563C1;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:#954F72;
        text-decoration:underline;}
p
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
        margin-right:0in;
        mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
        margin-left:0in;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
        {page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Hello
            everyone!  I hope you all had a great weekend!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Thank
            you to the Westlake team and staff for all of the hard work
            in assembling this information, particularly the detailed
            listing of all comments made throughout the process and
            responses by Westlake.  And,  thank you to Chuck and Philip
            for forwarding these comments in advance of the meeting –
            very helpful in preparing for the call!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
            look forward to talking with you all at the top of the
            hour.  We have a two-hour time slot scheduled today and a
            follow up meeting next week with an additional two hours to
            receive comments from Westlake and provide additional
            comments about the report before it is officially released
            to the public. 
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">We
            plan to provide Westlake an initial opportunity to provide
            an overview of the report today and then will go through the
            report section by section to provide everyone opportunities
            to comment.  We will continue to capture those comments, as
            in prior discussions, and Westlake will continue to document
            its response to those comments. 
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I
            look forward to the discussion and appreciate all of your
            hard work and time!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">With
            kindest regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Jen<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><b><span
style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,sans-serif;color:#0E325F;text-transform:uppercase">jennifer
                c. WOLFE, esq., apr, SSBB</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,sans-serif;color:#0E325F;text-transform:uppercase">Founder
              &amp; President, wolfe domain, a digital brand strategy
              advisory firm<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><b><i><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,sans-serif;color:#4BACC6;text-transform:uppercase">513.746.2800
                  x 1 or Cell 513.238.4348<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><b><i><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:&quot;Verdana&quot;,sans-serif;color:#4BACC6;text-transform:uppercase">IAM
                  300 - TOp 300 global ip strategists 2011-2014<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
            1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
                  style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">
                <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org">owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>
                [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org">mailto:owner-gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a>]
                <b>On Behalf Of </b>BRG<br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 04, 2015 4:57 AM<br>
                <b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gnso-review-dt@icann.org">gnso-review-dt@icann.org</a><br>
                <b>Subject:</b> [gnso-review-dt] Comment on newest
                revision of the Westlake review<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p><span
            style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">I
            would like to thank Westlake for the latest report and make
            the following 5 comments and recommendations.<br>
            <br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">1. Page
                14 preamble on structure</span></strong><b><br>
            </b>"<span style="color:blue">Many people commented on the
              GNSO’s structure and complexity and argued that these
              needed to change. We do not consider that the GNSO’s
              structure is perfect, or that it cannot be improved, but,
              having analysed the issues in some detail, our view is
              that the structure of the GNSO is not the main cause of
              its most pressing challenges.<br>
              In addition, the current structure of the GNSO has been in
              place for only about three years</span>."<br>
            This comment is misleading.<br>
            The 2 House structure was implemented in 2008. That is 7
            years ago.<br>
            Do Westlake mean the current form of the PDP and Working
            Groups?<br>
            This is different.<br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">Please
                change the text to clarify.</span></strong><b><br>
            </b><br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">2. The
                "pressing challenges" and recommendations 36 - 41.</span></strong><b><br>
            </b>These all focus on diversity.<br>
            They are  fine recommendations but NOT ones that addresses
            the issue of structure.
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">Please
                change the text to clarify.</span></strong><br>
            <br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">3.ICANN
                Board</span></strong><b><br>
            </b>In its resolution of 28 September 2013 the ICANN Board
            stated:<br>
            <span style="color:blue">"<strong><span
                  style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">GNSO
                  Structure is unlikely</span></strong> to accommodate
              the anticipated new stream of stakeholders resulting from
              the expansion of the TLD space. The GNSO Review will be an
              important vehicle for considering and addressing this
              issue. The unbalance that is already occurring needs to be
              addressed by the GNSO Review.</span> ”<br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">Why is
                this Board resolution not addressed in the report?</span></strong><b><br>
            </b><br>
            4. Page 14: "<span style="color:blue">Many people commented
              on the GNSO’s structure and complexity and argued that
              these needed to change</span>"<br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">Why is
                the opinion of "<span style="color:blue">many people</span>"
                not addressed in the report?</span></strong><b><br>
            </b><br>
            5. Understanding the past and the present.<br>
            Little attempt to analyse the lack of relevance* today of
            the 2 Houses structure has been made.<br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">Why is
                this?</span></strong><b><br>
            </b>*See below for a snip from the BRG survey submission</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p><span
            style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif"><br>
            Philip Sheppard<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
            <strong><span
                style="font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif">EDIT
                FROM BRG PAPER AND SURVEY SUBMISSION</span></strong><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            2008 GNSO reform created two Houses within the GNSO: the
            Contracted Party House and the Non-Contracted Party House.
            Put simply there is a suppliers House and a users House. And
            those Houses were given equal votes. This was a change from
            the GNSO of several separate Constituencies. This created a
            4-tier structure.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            rationale for the 2008 reform was threefold.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">a)
            Separable interests.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">There
            was a belief that the underlying user groups and supplier
            groups had separable interests that could be divided into
            six separable entities (registries, registrars, business
            interests, intellectual property interests, internet service
            providers, non-commercial interests).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">b)
            Commonality.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            rationale for the two Houses was that suppliers are impacted
            economically by policy and may be impacted in the same way:
            and users are impacted in a variety of ways by policy and
            may be impacted in the same way. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">c)
            Balance between the Houses.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">There
            was a belief that the interests of users and suppliers
            should be balanced.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><u><span
              style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">Issues<o:p></o:p></span></u></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">In
            2014, everything has changed. The rationale has changed.
            Indeed, the current structure creates new conflicts of
            interest.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">a)
            Separable interests.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">While
            different interests continue, it is no longer true that the
            separable interests are accurately reflected by the six
            separable entities (registries, registrars, business
            interests, intellectual property interests, internet service
            providers, non-commercial interests). There are two reasons
            for this.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">Conflicting
            relationships. There is a complex web of relationships that
            overlap and conflict within the six groups. A typical .brand
            registry may be simultaneously: a Registry, a Business
            Constituency member, an Intellectual Property Constituency
            member, and have a contractual relationship with other
            generic registries for back-end services.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">What
            is commercial? The old division within the users House
            between commercial and non-commercial is no longer relevant.
            Just within the 400 .brand registry applicants, some 15 are
            not-for-profit organisations representing some $69 billion
            in annual turnover. Two of these are current BRG members.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">b)
            Commonality.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            commonality assumption was historically questionable.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            commonality of interests within the old groups has changed.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">It
            was <u>never</u> true that users within each House acted as
            if they were impacted in the same way by policy. There has
            often been disagreement between commercial and
            non-commercial users, and between types of non-commercial
            user. This has been seen most clearly on issues connected
            with crime prevention (such as accurate Whois records and a
            difference of opinion on the balance of freedom of speech
            versus crime prevention).
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">It
            is <u>no longer</u> true that Registries are impacted
            economically by policy in the same way. The 400 .brand
            Registries will have a different view on many policy issues
            to the 800 generic Registries. This divide will be most
            clear where there is a choice between the costs imposed by a
            policy and the benefits of that policy such as crime
            prevention. In such a choice, generic registries and brand
            registries will typically have different opinions on cost
            versus benefit.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">c)
            Balance between the Houses.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">There
            is no objective reason for the current balance of votes.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            belief that the interests of users and suppliers should be
            balanced was predicated not on an external objective reason
            but on an internal compromise. In the 1999 Names Council a
            number of groups self-formed. These groups became the
            Constituencies of the GNSO. These groups in 2008 were
            charged to agree GNSO reform but they disagreed. The Houses
            concept was a compromise proposed to overcome this
            disagreement by severing the link between seats and votes.
            It was adopted out of expediency. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">d)
            Unnecessary complexity of Council /House /Stakeholder Group
            /Constituency</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">The
            Houses structure has made voting unnecessarily complex.
          </span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"
          style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:-.25in"><span
            style="font-family:Wingdings;color:blue">§</span><span
            style="font-size:7.0pt;color:blue">        
          </span><span
            style="font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;color:blue">Post
            2008, for some groups Council changed from a 2-tier to a
            4-tier structure. This has created unnecessary complexity
            and duplicated meeting agendas.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
        <p><span
            style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,sans-serif"><br>
             <o:p></o:p></span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  
<br /><br />
<hr style='border:none; color:#909090; background-color:#B0B0B0; height: 1px; width: 99%;' />
<table style='border-collapse:collapse;border:none;'>
        <tr>
                <td style='border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px'>
                        <a href="http://www.avast.com/">
                                <img border=0 src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" alt="Avast logo" />
                        </a>
                </td>
                <td>
                        <p style='color:#3d4d5a; font-family:"Calibri","Verdana","Arial","Helvetica"; font-size:12pt;'>
                                This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
                                <br><a href="http://www.avast.com/">www.avast.com</a>
                        </p>
                </td>
        </tr>
</table>
<br />
</body>
</html>