<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final
- To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final
- From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 10:12:46 -0400
Olivier,
It has been the practice of ALL working groups (albeit mostly in PDPs) to
address all of the comments received in writing without just a general
reference to a recording or minutes.
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [mailto:ocl@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 3:10 PM
To: Jonathan Robinson
Cc: Neuman, Jeff; 'Evan Leibovitch'; 'Berry Cobb'; gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CTCCC Advice Final
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>
[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<mailto: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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|