Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>]

Dear Jonathan,

would this be found in the minutes? Or transcript? Failing availability
of a transcript, there's always the recording.
https://community.icann.org/display/CMG/26+October+2012+Meeting

Kind regards,

Olivier

On 02/11/2012 11:28, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
>
> Thanks Jeff,
>
>  
>
> I think a rationale will help to clarify why any particular proposed
> change was not accepted.  That will be helpful.
>
>  
>
> Jonathan
>
>  
>
> *From:*owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Neuman, Jeff
> *Sent:* 02 November 2012 11:08
> *To:* Evan Leibovitch
> *Cc:* Berry Cobb; gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx; Jonathan Robinson
> *Subject:* RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final
>
>  
>
> Evan,
>
>  
>
> Perhaps you can provide the rationale as to why the changes were not
> adopted.  After all, that is required in any policy processes.  I have
> not seen that rationale.  I understand there is a strong bias amongst
> a number of members of the community against brand keyword TLDs, but
> in my opinion, that bias should not dictate the criteria.  For
> example, there is no reason at all for a brand operating a closed
> keyword TLD to disclose anywhere on its site the benefits of the TLD
> space, restrictions, etc.  It makes no business sense for anyone to do
> that.  Nor is that any real measure of “consumer” choice, competition,
> etc. 
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *Jeffrey J. Neuman**
> **Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs*
>
>  
>
> *From:*evanleibovitch@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:evanleibovitch@xxxxxxxxx>
> [mailto:evanleibovitch@xxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Evan Leibovitch
> *Sent:* Friday, November 02, 2012 11:02 AM
> *To:* Neuman, Jeff
> *Cc:* Berry Cobb; gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Robinson
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final
>
>  
>
> On 2 November 2012 05:10, Neuman, Jeff <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     My comments basically relate to my disagreement on the types of
>     criteria which the group has stated are relevant to brand TLDs
>     (even brand-keyword TLDs) and a couple of other areas where either
>     you didn’t understand my comments in the last draft (probably my
>     fault for not communicating them effectively) or you chose not to
>     adopt them.  I sat down with Jonathan for an hour or so in London
>     and went over them and he was intending on discussing those with
>     you all.
>
>  
>
> Jeff,
>
>  
>
> Numerous points were raised on your behalf at the last conference call
> and discussed at length.
>
>  
>
> Some were adopted, others not, with the group IMO fairly well
> understanding the intent of your proposed changes as well as the
> different characteristics of different kinds of TLDs. You're welcome
> to listen to the recording as evidence of the discussion. Some of your
> suggestions made perfect sense, as some of the metrics were
> inapplicable to certain kinds of applications. OTOH, some of your
> suggested exemptions were strongly objected to for a number of reasons.
>
>  
>
> I have little interest in rehashing issues which have already been
> discussed and resolved.
>
>  
>
> - Evan
>
>  
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html