<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [bc-gnso] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition - New gTLD Registrars and Registries will Compete for the Benefit of Consumers
- To: <martinsutton@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] ICANN Board Votes to Enhance New gTLDs Competition - New gTLD Registrars and Registries will Compete for the Benefit of Consumers
- From: "Frederick Felman" <Frederick.Felman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:35:08 -0800
I wonder what surprises are in store within the new AG.
Sent from +1(415)606-3733
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:16 AM, "martinsutton@xxxxxxxx" <martinsutton@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-09nov10-en.htm
>
> ICANN's Board of Directors voted to allow new gTLD registries to own
> registrars, opting not to create new rules prohibiting registrars from
> applying for or operating new gTLD registries.
> Following over two years of community discussions, which had not resulted in
> consensus, the Board carefully considered expert economic advice, community
> comments, and numerous proposed approaches to registry-registrar
> cross-ownership.
>
> "In the absence of existing policy or new bottom-up policy recommendations,
> the Board saw no rationale for placing restrictions on cross-ownership;" said
> Peter Dengate Thrush, Chairman of the Board. "Any possible abuses can be
> better addressed by properly targeted mechanisms. Co-ownership rules are not
> an optimal technique in this area."
>
> Under the Board resolution additional enforcement mechanisms have been added.
> New gTLD registry agreements are to include: (1) a Code of Conduct
> prohibiting any misuse of data or other abusive conduct arising out of
> registry-registrar cross-ownership; (2) robust auditing requirements; (3)
> graduated sanctions up to and including contractual termination and punitive
> damages; and (4) ICANN's right to refer competition issues to appropriate
> government competition authorities.
>
> Background: The cross-ownership provisions have varied over time and no
> formal "policy" on this topic has ever been recommended or adopted by ICANN.
> (For example, each of the seven new gTLDs delegated by ICANN in the 2000-2001
> proof-of-concept introduced by ICANN in 2000 have featured some degree of
> registry-registrar cross-operation or cross-ownership.)
>
> The ICANN community has been discussing whether to continue, expand or remove
> the restrictions in current registry agreements that limit the existing
> registries from owning more than 15% of a registrar. Some have urged the
> creation of new rules that would for the first time prohibit registrars from
> applying for or operating new gTLDs.
>
> The ICANN Board had previously attempted to spur a consensus view, asking
> ICANN's GNSO to resolve the registry-registrar cross-ownership question. In
> May 2010, the ICANN Board encouraged the GNSO to develop a consensus based
> policy on this issue, but indicated that the Board would review the issue if
> no consensus position was reached. The GNSO recently reported that it has
> been unable to reach consensus.
>
> Martin C SUTTON
> Group Risk
> Manager, Group Fraud Risk and Intelligence | HSBC HOLDINGS PLC HGHQ
> Group Security & Fraud Risk
> 8 Canada Square,Canary Wharf,London,E14 5HQ,United Kingdom
> ________________________________________________________________
>
> Phone. +44 (0)20 7991 8074 / 7991 8074
> Mobile. +44 (0) 7774556680
> Email. martinsutton@xxxxxxxx
> ________________________________________________________________
> ----------------------------------------- SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU
> PRINT! This E-mail is confidential. It may also be legally privileged. If you
> are not the addressee you may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of
> it. If you have received this message in error, please delete it and all
> copies from your system and notify the sender immediately by return E-mail.
> Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely secure, error or
> virus-free. The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|