Re: [alac] ALAC position on ICANN/Verisign deal?

["Jacqueline Morris" <jam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I like it - no changes on my part

On 2/20/06, Bret Fausett <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Taking the comments from the list, how about if we submit the following:
> --
>
> Dear Dr. Cerf:
>
> The At Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") has carefully reviewed and
> considered the revised agreements between ICANN and Verisign and does
> not believe that the revisions address the serious concerns of
> registrants previously described by the ALAC in both its written
> submissions and its meeting with the Board in Vancouver. For this
> reason, the ALAC recommends that the Board take the following action:
>
>     1.   Reject the proposed settlement agreement;
>     2.   Proceed to trial with Verisign; and
>     3.   Begin a renewal/rebid process for .COM in accord with the
> renewal provisions of the existing agreement.
>
> The ALAC understands that ICANN Staff believes that one of the
> litigation risks to ICANN is that the legal foundation on which ICANN
> was built will be questioned or eroded. This is a risk we believe is
> worth taking. An ICANN that cannot ensure competition and protect
> registrants from monopolistic pricing is not an ICANN worth retaining.
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
> At Large Advisory Committee
>
>


--
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online