[ncdnhc-discuss] Names Council Task Force ORG policy

[Adam Peake]

And in the light of day I agree with Barbara and Michael.  Let's 
discuss CEDRP within the constituency before bothering the Names 
Council.

Vany, thanks, but please do not put this on the Names Council agenda.

Apologies for the confusion.

Adam

Adam Peake
GLOCOM  Tokyo


>Dear Vany,
>
>I apologize for the confusion I have caused.
>As you will see when you catch up with your email,
>I misunderstood what Adam was saying.  At this point,
>I am opposed to raising the subject of the CEDRP
>at the NC meeting, though I'd be interested in discussing
>it in the NCDNHC meeting - if we have time after we
>have dealt with all the other issues with which we are
>confronted.
>
>I hope you do not propose this subject for the next
>f2f meeting of the NC.
>
>Thanks for all the effort you are putting into this work.
>Regards,
>Barbara
>
>Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales wrote:
>
>>  Hi Adam, Barbara and all:
>>
>>  I am member of the Intake Commitee.  I also consider important the 
>>subject of the CEDRP.
>>
>>  I will propose this subject for the agenda of the next f2f NC meeting!
>>
>>  In the meanwhile I propose that the NCDNHC also includes in its 
>>agenda of work the CEDRP
>>  and be proactive as the NCDNHC was with the UDRP.
>>
>>  Best Regards
>>  Vany
>>
>>  Barbara Simons wrote:
>>
>>  > 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
>>  >
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  > Discuss mailing list
>>  > Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>>  > http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>  --
>>  Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
>>  Information Technology Specialist
>>  Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
>>  e-mail: vany at sdnp.org.pa
>>  http://www.sdnp.org.pa
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Discuss mailing list
>>  Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>>  http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss