[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Selection of the interim ioard
Perusing the IFWP Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>, the NTIA comments
and other sources, I learn:
* CABASE says the list of nominees to the Interim Board does not include
any of the candidates submitted by various entities in Latin America
* NSI's CEO says the list of nominees to the Interim Board does not include
any of the candidates submitted by his company.
* The International Trademark Association says the list of nominees to the
Interim Board does not meet the "international trademark holder" threshold
which was established in the "White Paper."
* The Boston Working Group says the interim board suggested by the draft
was presented without any open nomination process or discussion.
* Fundacio' Catalana per a la Recerca (FCR) says the nomination list lacks
a member from a non-OECD country.
* Participants of the IFWP Discussion List <email@example.com> say that the
interim board must be chosen by an open nomination process; such a process
has begun through the list.
So now we have come full circle, as I again raise the question which
dominated the discussion in the first days of the GIAW meeting in Reston:
How was consensus determined in arriving at the list of nominees
for the Interim Board submitted by IANA to the Department of Commerce?
Where is the evidence of an open and transparent process?
"If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog." Harry S Truman
Ellen Rony //
Co-author: The Domain Name Handbook *=" ____ /
http://www.domainhandbook.com \ )
firstname.lastname@example.org || ||
+1 (415) 435-5010