[council] FW: VeriSign's language on New Registry Services

[GNSO.SECRETARIAT@GNSO.ICANN.ORG]

Forwarded from Jeff Neuman

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	FW: VeriSign's language on New Registry Services
Date: 	Wed, 6 Jul 2005 08:47:53 -0400
From: 	Neuman, Jeff <Jeff.Neuman at neustar.us>
To: 	GNSO.SECRETARIAT at GNSO.ICANN.ORG <gnso.secretariat at gnso.icann.org>
CC: 	<bruce.tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>
Glen,

There seems to be no place to post this comment although I believe the
Council should see this posting as it is extremely relevant now.  I
would have gotten it in during the comment period, but unfortunately,
ICANN did not make the world aware of what it was doing for .net until
after the comment period for registry services was over.

Jeff



------------------------------------------------------------------------

*From:* Neuman, Jeff
*Sent:* Tuesday, July 05, 2005 5:42 PM
*To:* 'registry-services at icann.org'
*Cc:* 'bruce.tonkin at melbourneit.com.au'; 'secretariat at gnso.icann.org';
'Bhavin Turakhia'
*Subject:* VeriSign's language on New Registry Services





All,


Enclosed is a compare version of VeriSign’s new .net agreement as
compared with the draft that was posted in March.  In light of the
changes VeriSign got in its .net agreement, I believe that no further
discussion should take place within the GNSO Council on the process for
Registry Services other than all registries should have the same
language as VeriSign’s .net agreement.  Anything else, I believe is
unacceptable and flies in the face of any notion of fair and free
competition amongst the registries.


Jeff

  (PLEASE NOTE THIS IS POSTED IN MY PERSONAL CAPACITY AND DOES NOT
NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEW OF MY COMPANY)


-- 
Glen de Saint Géry
GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
http://gnso.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: net agreement compared.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 500736 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20050706/34d7e95d/netagreementcompared.doc>