RE: [bc-gnso] BC position EOI

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Philip for all your work on this.  I support this draft.  I agree
completely with Phil Corwin's comments about distraction, which I think are
covered well in the document.

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> 

 

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Phil Corwin
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 8:17 AM
To: Philip Sheppard; bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC position EOI

 

ICA is fine with the final draft.

 

While we do not have a formal position pro or con on the EOI, my personal
view is that it is a distraction from the main game -- that every hour spent
debating whether there should be an EOI, what its purpose is, and what its
terms should be is an hour that is not being devoted to resolving the key
issues that would permit the new gTLD application window to open.

 

 

Philip S. Corwin 
Partner 
Butera & Andrews 
1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
Suite 500 
Washington, DC 20004

202-347-6875 (office) 

202-347-6876 (fax)

202-255-6172 (cell)

"Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey

  _____  

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip
Sheppard [philip.sheppard@xxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 3:30 AM
To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bc-gnso] BC position EOI

Thank you for the last round of comments.

Our 14 day process is almost complete and I wanted to send a copy of our
paper so that BC colleagues in Nairobi will have a position to speak to.

 

I attach a version three factoring in the last round of comments / support.
This includes all substantive contributions of content though not all of the
style suggestions. Us rapporteurs should be free to retain that element!

 

For good order I also attach a clean version 3 and have entitled it "final"
to facilitate any external communication in Nairobi.

 

Philip