RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] First stab at objectives and a definition of VI

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> Milton, on a personal level I'm not on-board with your definition of cross
> ownership at all. I'm OK with the first sentence, but would rather not
> link CO to VI in the definition. If we set separate definitions of VI and
> CO, why link the two in the CO definition.

Stephane, I know you're asking what others think, but just a point of 
clarification. The second sentence of my definition did not "link" CO to VI, it 
_differentiates_ or distinguishes the two. It makes it clear that we do NOT 
consider CO as defined there to be a form of VI. 

For all the reasons we've discussed, I think that distinction is very 
important, and will really help the WG to have a more focused and rational 
discussion of the policy issues.