proposed statement for the IOC/IFRC DT resolution

[Ginger Paque]

+1
Ginger (Virginia) Paque

VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
Diplo Foundation
Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme
www.diplomacy.edu/ig



On 27 September 2012 07:47, Andrei Barburas <abarburas at iicd.org> wrote:
> +1 from me.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Andrei Barburas
>
> Community Relations Services Officer
>
>
>
> International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD)
>
> P.O. Box 11586, 2502 AN The Hague, The Netherlands
>
> NPOC, ICANN member
>
>
> Mobile: +31 62 928 2879
>
> Phone: +31 70 311 7311
> Fax: +31 70 311 7322
> Website: www.iicd.org
>
>
>
> People   ICT   Development
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>
>> The IOC/IFRC is claiming consensus on its proposal to suggest a temporary
>> registration block for the IOC and IFRC. This is the statement I propose be
>> added to the statement indicating the disagreement of the NCSG with that
>> proposal.
>>
>> I request that the NCSG-PC endorse this statement.
>>
>> -----
>>
>> The NCSG rejects the 3b "temporary registration block." defined in
>> IOC/IFRC Drafting Team' recommendation for a number of reasons:
>>
>> 1. Policy recommendations from the GNSO on reserved names can only be made
>> by a PDP that is properly constituted and is run according to the process
>> rules as established in the ICANN by-laws.
>>
>> 2. This drafting team continues to circumvent proper process by attempting
>> to make policy as opposed to performing its proper function of fact
>> gathering and presenting information to the council that can be used in
>> deciding on the viability and charter for such a PDP.
>>
>> The NCSG supports the PDP only on the condition that among the possible
>> outcomes is the current status quo, no protection at the second level. We
>> support the PDP as the only appropriate place to resolve this proposal among
>> competing proposals. We believe it is illegitimate to change reserved name
>> policy,,,,, no matter how it is euphemistically named, before the PDP runs
>> its course.
>>
>> The NCSG is also aware of other types of humanitarian organization that
>> also demand these privileges and we feel that any discussion on granting
>> such special reservations must include a full discussion of all who request
>> such reservations.
>>
>> Finally the NCSG does not believe that the reserved name list can be used
>> solely for the purpose of new gTLDs, and that any decisions on adding names
>> to the reserved list must take incumbent registries into account.
>>
>>
>> ------
>> Avri Doria
>
>