<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: IRT meeting London</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Dear Milton,<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for this. Just briefly a couple of comments on Jeff’s response.<BR>
The statement I read is along the same lines as Kathy’s (you may compare them) and that was done intentionally since it was meant to be representing NCUC’s views. What Jeff needs to understand is that the people who were participating in the meeting were not in NY and thus never heard Kathy’s statement. This is the position of the NCUC team and if I was able to go to Hong Kong and Abu Dhabi, I would have repeated exactly the same thing. <BR>
The line of speakers was not that big behind me and that does not explain an interruption (even if they were a hundred). This is an open consultation and everyone has the right to speak (free speech if it still means anything). There were a lot of speakers that repeated the same thing or even saying irrelevant things; why didn’t Jeff interrupted them. Would a 2-3 minute statement cost that much to the IRT? <BR>
As for the discussion on the IP Clearinghouse, what Jeff is saying is correct only (and for this I am almost certain) I had this discussion with Fabricio (who actually was the only one to invite us to a discussion because as he said some things might have been misunderstood by both sides) and not Jeff. I don’t think I interacted with him after interrupting me. <BR>
This was definitely not a personal attack. But, for me it was an effort not to have our concerns being addressed in London, in fear of explosive reactions like in NY.<BR>
<BR>
Konstantinos<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 16/07/2009 18:11, "Milton L Mueller" <<a href="mueller@SYR.EDU">mueller@SYR.EDU</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT FACE="Arial">This is Jeff Neuman's response. although there are obviously disagreements, I think it's good to engage in dialogue. <BR>
</FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Times New Roman">Milton Mueller<BR>
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies<BR>
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
Internet Governance Project:<BR>
<a href="http://internetgovernance.org">http://internetgovernance.org</a> <<a href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org/</a>> <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"> <BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="100%"></FONT><FONT FACE="Tahoma, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><B>From:</B> Neuman, Jeff [<a href="mailto:Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us">mailto:Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us</a>] <BR>
<B>Sent:</B> Thursday, July 16, 2009 1:02 PM<BR>
<B>To:</B> Milton L Mueller; <a href="NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCUC-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>; Richard Tindal<BR>
<B>Cc:</B> Neuman, Jeff<BR>
<B>Subject:</B> RE: IRT meeting London<BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#1F497D">Thanks Milton for forwarding this on to me. Milton, I am not on the NCUC list, so can you please forward this to me. This is my personal view only and not necessarily the view of my company or the IRT.<BR>
<BR>
It seems like there may have been a misunderstanding and I would be happy to explain from my point of view what happened.<BR>
<BR>
When Konstantinos got up to the mike, there was a very long line of potential speakers behind him. He began reading from a pre-prepared statement criticizing the IRT and its report without pausing to give anyone an opportunity to address any of the issues point by point. This in my mind demonstrated a lack on Konstantinos’ part of wanting to engage in a dialogue, but rather just get his statement out there. After reading the first couple of sentences, and after I believe Nick Wood, the moderator, asked Konstantinos a question about his comments, I did interject. I merely asked Konstantinos if he was reading the exact same statement that Kathy read into the record in NY. Konstantinos nodded yes. At that point, I did not ask him to speed up or stop talking, but rather asked if he could summarize the points, rather than reading the long pre-prepared statement. This would not only cut down the time of the statement (to ensure everyone got their opportunity to speak), but allow us to ask questions, which we did.<BR>
<BR>
Konstantinos also neglected to include in his report back that I too engaged him in a dialogue about the notion of multiple clearinghouses. In fact, I explained exactly the rationale which the IRT used in its report and why on balance we did not recommend having multiple clearinghouses for the first round of TLDs. I explained to Konstantinos that since registries would have to technically interact with all clearinghouses, a new protocol may have to be developed to allow for that exchange of information from multiple providers. After all, a brand owner would only go to one clearinghouse, but the registry would have to interact with them all (after first figuring out which clearinghouse contained the data that the brand owner used). So, in essence, the registry would have to get registration data from a registrar and either collect additional information as to which clearinghouse a brand owner used or do a look up to get that information. In either case, this may be doing something that is not currently provided for the EPP protocol. It would require either an update to EPP or the development of such a new protocol. From my perspective, this would not only take a long time, but would also have to go through a technical standards process review. The IRT believed that this would inevitably delay the new TLD process (something that the NCUC does not want to see, at least according to its public statements). Konstantinos nodded as if to understand and asked why we did not make that more clear in the report (which I believe is a valid point). We could have made this more clear.<BR>
<BR>
While I am commenting on the note below, let me also make the following points (which you can all hear by listening to the recording):<BR>
<BR>
1. I do not believe the IRT toned down its presentation at all. It was mostly a different panel, with persons<BR>
</FONT></FONT></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><FONT COLOR="#1F497D"><BR>
</FONT>-- <BR>
Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,<BR>
Lecturer in Law,<BR>
GigaNet Membership Chair,<BR>
University of Strathclyde,<BR>
The Lord Hope Building,<BR>
141 St. James Road,<BR>
Glasgow, G4 0LT,<BR>
UK<BR>
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306<BR>
email: <a href="k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk">k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk</a> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN>
</BODY>
</HTML>