Status of VI WG Efforts
Rosemary Sinclair
Rosemary.Sinclair at ATUG.ORG.AU
Wed Jul 21 08:39:35 CEST 2010
I agree - I'm just reading it now! It's really helpful
Cheers
Rosemary
Rosemary Sinclair
Managing Director, ATUG
Chairman, INTUG
T: +61 2 94958901 F: +61 2 94193889
M: +61 413734490
Email: rosemary.sinclair at atug.org.au
<mailto:rosemary.sinclair at atug.org.au>
Skype: rasinclair
Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information
www.atug.com.au
________________________________
From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
Mary Wong
Sent: Wednesday, 21 July 2010 4:31 PM
To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: Status of VI WG Efforts
I urge everyone to read Milton's blog post (below) - it really does give
a good sense of where things stand in the Working Group, and for those
members who have not been following the vertical integration issue
closely, provides an excellent place to catch up!
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
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:
Milton L Mueller <mueller at SYR.EDU>
To:
<NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
Date:
7/20/2010 9:24 AM
Subject:
Re: Status of VI WG Efforts
I just blogged about this. It's a short summary but gives you all the
essence.
http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2010/7/20/4582700.html
From: NCSG-NCUC [mailto:NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of
Debra Hughes
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:47 AM
To: NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] Status of VI WG Efforts
Can someone in the VI WG provide an update on how things are going?
There is a lot of traffic on the Council list indicating that it is
possible the WG may not have consensus on important points before the
Board meeting in September. I think many would agree that allowing the
current language in DAG4 to remain unchanged is problematic.
I certainly hope the single registrant/private registry exception has
support. As I mentioned in Brussels, this exclusion is important for
not-for-profit organizations or other entities that may consider a new
gTLD for purposes that are not driven by a profit motive, but rather, to
create a safer place to execute its mission or to deliver its services.
Many companies and not-for-profit organizations that are considering new
gTLDs may not intend to offer registrations to the public.
Thanks,
Debbie
Debra Y. Hughes l Senior Counsel
American Red Cross
Office of the General Counsel
2025 E Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20006
Phone: (202) 303-5356
Fax: (202) 303-0143
HughesDeb at usa.redcross.org <mailto:HughesDeb at usa.redcross.org>
<http://www.piercelaw.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100721/ddeb1b1a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14408 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100721/ddeb1b1a/attachment.jpg>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list