Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] VI DT - FYI
- To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] VI DT - FYI
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 02:02:35 -0500
Yes we have one of those situations where
- through a PDP vote, the GNSO council has decided in its bylaws approved
bottom up way that there is some policy work to do that is within its purview
(as confirmed by Staff)
- and a Board that seems to have decided that not withstanding the GNSO
priority in making GTLD policy, they are going to work with the Implementation
Team on a solution.
Makes for yet another interesting issue for the Nairobi meeting.
Lets just hope they at least release the information that they are keeping
On 20 Feb 2010, at 01:44, Berry Cobb wrote:
> VI DT,
> Perhaps I am the only one who missed this. Did anyone catch this at the end
> of the new gTLD documents release announcement by ICANN on the 15th?
> Refer to the bottom of the page….. Does anyone know what this new model is?
> Vertical Integration (aka Registry/Registrar Separation)
> Based on debates on the subject held at the ICANN meetings in Seoul,
> discussion during the consultation with certain community representatives
> held on 7 January 2010 in Washington D.C., and ongoing study, ICANN will
> propose for community comment a new registry-registrar separation model for
> inclusion in the next draft of the gTLD agreement. Additionally, theBoard and
> community members will be discussing the issue in Nairobi.
> I would also like to repost this aspect from the 4 Feb 2010 Board minutes, as
> there were comments on our last call question whether “other” documents
> existed specific to VI.
> • New gTLDs: Vertical Integration
> Prior to any discussion on this matter, the Chair identified Board members
> and liaisons with conflicts of interest on this issue. The non-conflicted
> Board members approved a motion to request that two directors, and four
> liaisons withdraw from participation in the discussion due to their conflicts
> of interest. After confirmation of removal, the Board proceeded with
> discussion on the matter.
> The Board received an update from staff, including a draft of an economic
> model from economists contracted by ICANN relating to the on the ongoing
> community work, study and review of the registry/registrar separation
> requirement and the ongoing expert economist work on the issue. Staff
> presented a draft economic model to the board and recommended that it be
> posted for public comment. The Board discussed some of the economic theories
> and assumptions behind the economist’s work, and there was a discussion of
> additional work that might need to be done on this matter, as well as a sense
> of the Board that the model should not be published yet, pending further
> review and consideration. The CEO and Chairman agreed to convene on a review
> of the model and what additional steps could be taken. Staff advised the
> Board that a delay of Board consideration of this issue might delay the
> timeline of the new gTLD program. Following on from various board member
> comments, the CEO requested that any assumptions or market theories (or
> comments on the assumptions and market theories), that had not been
> considered or were within the draft model, should be provided to the CEO and
> Chair to enable additional work on the model.
> After the close of discussion, all Board members and liaisons were invited
> back into the meeting.
> Berry A. Cobb
> Infinity Portals LLC