ICANN staff proposal for further concessions to IPC-BC

[Avri Doria]

Hi Alain,

They tried that route, but the consensus did not go their way.  Instead of getting required RPMs they got the recommendation that every new gTLD should use a RPM and they produced a nice volume of possible RPMs that the applications could, and should, use voluntarily.  This was the first compromise they agreed to when they voted in favor of the new gTLD program.

Little did we know at the time that compromise was just a stepping stone to future victory.

So ever since they have been trying and trying and trying: IRT, STI, Fadi's strawman

And each time they try, they get  a little close to what they want.

Ignoring the multistakeholder process and using each compromise as a booster for the next assault is a tried & true IPC/BC method that has worked well at ICANN.  And thus they have no reason to stop using that technique.  Fadi is just the latest attack vector.

We keep going this way, and IPC/BC will own our first born children, or at least the names we give them.

avri

On 2 Dec 2012, at 20:14, Alain Berranger wrote:

> Thanks Robin. Dear all,
> 
> Is it not the essence of a strawman solution to be imperfect and to be subjected to further testing, consultations and brain-storming? 
> 
> Can we ask IPC/BC and/or ICANN staff why a strawman solution is chosen as opposed to a Working Group or a PDP or whatever else ICANN uses to establish policies? Maybe I should know the answer but I don't. I may only speculate that time is of the essence for commercial interests and  that the proposed strawman solution suits their purposes.
> 
> Can any insights be shared from the IP lawyers in NCSG or anyone else in the know?
> 
> Thanks, Alain
> 
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org> wrote:
> Dear All:
> 
> ICANN has released its proposed strawman solution to give further concessions to the IPC-BC.  
>   http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/tmch-strawman-30nov12-en.htm
> 
> ICANN presents this "solution" like it is the output of a community process and consensus, but it is really just a bunch of executive decisions based one-sided discussions, over the objections of many in the community.  
> 
> Really disappointing how staff is undermining ICANN's bottom-up multi-stakeholder policy process at exactly the time it should be strengthening it.
> 
> Robin
> 
> 
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
> 
> 
> AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ
> Ce courriel est confidentiel et est à l’usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute personne qui lit le présent message sans en être le destinataire, ou l’employé(e) ou la personne responsable de le remettre au destinataire, est par les présentes avisée qu’il lui est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer, de le modifier ou de le reproduire, en tout ou en partie . Si le destinataire ne peut être joint ou si ce document vous a été communiqué par erreur, veuillez nous en informer sur le champ  et détruire ce courriel et toute copie de celui-ci. Merci de votre coopération.
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY MESSAGE
> This e-mail message is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. Please note that, should this message be read by anyone other than the addressee, his or her employee or the person responsible for forwarding it to the addressee, it is strictly prohibited to disclose, distribute, modify or reproduce the contents of this message, in whole or in part. If the addressee cannot be reached or if you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and delete this e-mail and destroy all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
> 
>