[ncdnhc-discuss] Names Council Task Force ORG policy

[Barbara Simons]

I support Adam's request, and I urge readers to look
at Michael Froomkin's article, which I just read.  In
case you deleted that email, it's at
http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=355
Regards,
Barbara

Adam Peake wrote:

> >Surely you jest.  Almost nothing in the new gTLD contracts springs from
> >any process other than Louis Touton.
>
> Then I ask our Adcom members to add the CEDRP as an emergency item
> for discussion during the next NC meeting?
>
> There must be space on the agenda as everyone seems to agree that the
> GA chair item is a silly formality (including the names council
> chair.)  Quite a few NC members were more than a little put out when
> Verisign contract negotiations bypassed the DNSO, this seems no less
> of a slight.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
> Adam Peake
> GLOCOM  Tokyo
>
> >Although touted as 'template' agreements and 'models' they were negotiated
> >in secret, with strong-arm tactics and without any input from affected
> >third parties.
> >
> >Exhibit A for What's Wrong With ICANN.
> >
> >cf. http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=355
> >
> >On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Adam Peake wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>  >I support ORG being sponsored and unrestricted.  But, is it a good
> >>  >idea at this stage to deny any opportunity for innovation wrt some
> >>  >kind of restriction beyond end user choice?
> >>  >
> >  > >What is a "CEDRP"
> >>
> >>
> >>  Someone kindly answered my question:
> >>
> >>
> >><http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/sponsored/sponsorship-agmt-att12-08sep01.htm>
> >>
> >>   From which consensus policy did this piece of work come from?  I
> >>  thought the DNSO organized a couple of working groups on IP issues
> >>  and new TLDs, and there's a UDRP task force ongoing now. There was
> >>  absolutely nothing like this in any work I remember.
> >>
> >>  Thanks,
> >>
> >>  Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>  >Thanks,
> >>  >
> >>  >Adam
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >>This is the draft of the policy that will go out for public comment.
> >>  >>The NC Task Force has been working together reasonably well.
> >>  >>There are some possible tensions around the issue of
> >>  >>marketing restrictions on registrars, but on the whole everyone
> >>  >>seems to buy into the specific approach here. You comments
> >>  >  >welcome.
> >>  >  >
> >>  _______________________________________________
> >>  Discuss mailing list
> >>  Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> >>  http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
> >
> >--
> >               Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> >A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin at law.tm
> >U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> >+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
> >                  -->It's very hot and humid here.<--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss