<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
Keith — as president of the RySG, you’re in a good position to answer a question about RYSG comments on CCWG’s first draft. This regards section 6.2 — bringing Affirmation of Commitments reviews into the ICANN bylaws.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
The RySG had a concern with respect to the following text from the AoC review of the 2012 gTLD expansion:</div>
<blockquote style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">
<div> ICANN will ensure that as it expands the top-level domain space, will adequately address issues of competition, consumer protection, security, stability and resiliency, malicious abuse issues, sovereignty concerns, and rights protection. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
RySG agrees that the above issues are important topics, but wish to underscore that these topics must be addressed through the multi-stakeholder model and not unilaterally by ICANN as an organization. "We urge that this be clarified in the final proposal." </div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif">So RySG w</font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">ants to require a bottom-up multistakeholder process to turn new gTLD review team recommendations into the next round gTLD guidebook. </font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">As a point of clarification, does RySG believe that a community-driven AoC review is sufficiently bottom-up, or should we require a different process — such as a PDP in the GNSO? </font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Do you generally view the AoC Reviews as “unilateral by ICANN as an organization"</font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
Regards,</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<div>
<div id="MAC_OUTLOOK_SIGNATURE">
<div>—</div>
<div>
<div>Steve DelBianco</div>
<div>Executive Director</div>
<div>NetChoice</div>
<div><a href="http://www.netchoice.org/">http://www.NetChoice.org</a> and <a href="http://blog.netchoice.org/">http://blog.netchoice.org</a></div>
<div>+1.703.615.6206</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>