Makes sense. Thanks. Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 08:16 AM Eastern Standard Time
To: Nevett, Jonathon
Cc: Liz Williams; gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Approach to guidelines
Jon, this is pretty much what I had suggested at the outset of last
weeks call. So I'm on board with most of it.
However, I don't think there should be any assumption that
Registries would be *required* to implement a rights protection
mechanism - it should be left up to them based on their model,
intended use, and discussions with the community.
I also recommended that we don't refer to any guidelines as *best
practices.* It creates a negative connotation for those registries
who may decide not to implement them, or only part of them. And may
inhibit creative thinking about better mechanisms - afterall
there's no way we can cover every possible need or predict what
tlds will be applied for.
Tim
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-pro-wg] Approach to guidelines
From: "Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, April 18, 2007 9:20 am
To: "Liz Williams" <liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-pro-
wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Working Group Members/New gTLD Committee Members:
My feeling is that this kind of document would be
incredibly helpful to
prospective registries in determining in what manner they
would protect
the rights of others. Providing educational guidelines
would enable
future registries to learn from the mistakes of, as well as
the best
practices from, other registries. It also would be helpful to
registrars and users in achieving some best practice
standards in
implementing such protections.
With that said, I think that we need to leave discretion in
the hands of
the prospective registries to see what method of protection
works best
for the proposed registry taking into account its
prospective business
model and market. I would think, therefore, that these
guidelines
should not be included in the New gTLD Committee report.
Rather, in my
opinion, the report should acknowledge the importance of
the principle
of protecting the rights of others, refer to fact that the
GNSO has
established a working group to provide educational
guidelines to
prospective registries, and state that registries have
discretion in
implementing such protections, but that the selected method of
protection may be considered in the application process (to
the extent
there is a "beauty contest" type of allocation.
I absolutely support the important work on the guidelines, but
de-linking these guidelines from the actual New gTLD
Committee report
would give the prospective registries, which may be
concerned about
specific proscriptive measures, the ability to roll up
their sleeves and
assist in providing a document that would be most useful
and beneficial
to all concerned. I don't think that we are on that road
yet, and we
all are way too busy to spend time dealing with roadblocks
and/or
needless work.
Thanks.
Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx <https://
email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?
aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX.ComGNSO.pro-
wg&uid=159#Compose> [mailto:owner-gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx <https://
email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?
aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX.ComGNSO.pro-
wg&uid=159#Compose> ]
On Behalf Of Liz Williams
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 9:27 AM
To: gnso-pro-wg@xxxxxxxxx <https://email.secureserver.net/
pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX.ComGNSO.pro-
wg&uid=159#Compose>
Subject: [gnso-pro-wg] Approach to guidelines
Everyone
I hope that the following notes are helpful to stimulate
discussion
about text which could be included in any "guideline" (for
want of a
better term) document.
This document would be, from my perspective, a major output
of the
group for the Committee to consider.
The attached document collates the existing new TLDs
principles,
recommendations and implementation guidelines which should
be used as
the first reference point. All text should refer to that
table so
that we can "support" any recommendations. We should also be
proposing alternatives -- considering that it is unlikely
that this
group will reach consensus on the proposals?
At the end of the document there is a page to start writing
up any
guideline which may emerged from, in the first instance, email
exchange amongst the group.
I don't recall who else volunteered to write this up --
perhaps an
email exchange would be helpful first to get rough groundwork
established.
Of course, any questions, just ask.
Liz
.....................................................
Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob