[ncsg-policy] Re: Vertical integration charter

Milton L Mueller mueller at SYR.EDU
Sun Feb 21 19:05:43 CET 2010


OK, it looks as if all the feedback I've gotten favors the more delimited, policy determination objective.
If there are any dissenting voices please speak up, otherwise Avri and I will report to the DT that we (NCUC/NCSG) favor the first version of Objective 5.
--MM

________________________________
From: Non-Commercial User Constituency [NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Brenden Kuerbis [bkuerbis at INTERNETGOVERNANCE.ORG]
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:05 PM
To: NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] [ncsg-policy] Re: Vertical integration charter

+1, it is best to limit the scope of the PDP as best we can

---------------------------------------
Brenden Kuerbis
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org


On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Mary Wong <MWong at piercelaw.edu<mailto:MWong at piercelaw.edu>> wrote:
I agree and support Milton's and Avri's version, particularly in view of the very tight time frame the PDP will take place in.

Cheers
Mary

Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law & Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street
Concord, NH 03301
USA
Email: mwong at piercelaw.edu<mailto:mwong at piercelaw.edu>
Phone: 1-603-513-5143
Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php
Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584


>>>
From:   William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch<mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>>
To:     NCUC Members List <NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto:NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>, NCSG-Policy <ncsg-policy at n4c.eu<mailto:ncsg-policy at n4c.eu>>
Date:   2/21/2010 6:30 AM
Subject:        [ncsg-policy] Re: Vertical integration charter
Hi

On Feb 21, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

My version, on the other hand, simply asks the WG to make a determination whether the staff deviated from existing policy/practices in drafting the contract. That is a more objective, well-defined and less open-ended objective and can be completed in a reasonable period of time.
Therefore, I am asking for your support so that Avri and I can legitimate tell the Drafting Team that NCUC/NCSG support the first version of Objective 5.

Of course.  Our point was always to set in place a coherent and reasoned framework to replace decision making based on staff fiat, not to slow down new gTLDs.

Bill


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100221/dfb4ca26/attachment.html>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list