Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: RySG Supermajority view on Vertical Integration

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff,

My intent was just to forward the document to the group as it was submitted 
last year as we are engaging in a collection of positions exercise. I was 
careful to not forward it as an advocacy statement and just stated it need to 
be considered with all other proposals, including your positions, and staff's 
position.
Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
Vice President, Law & Policy
NeuStar, Inc.
Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx


________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Fri Mar 19 12:29:20 2010
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: RySG Supermajority view on Vertical Integration
Jeff- I do not mind if the Registries want to advance their position and fully 
expect them to, and I am OK if you put forth a proposal, but would ask if you 
want it to be included you only include a proposal, and not prejudicial and 
unfounded claims such as the one below.



 Despite the plea by the CRAI Report to move slowly and deliberately only with 
the two test cases identified in the report, the ICANN staff, swayed by a few 
registrars seeking to enter the gTLD Registry market, ignored the authors of 
the CRAI Report and recommended an approach to the registry/registrar issue 
that is not only inconsistent with the CRAI Report, but is rife with so many 
loopholes that the solution is certain to be gamed by new registry operators, 
registrars, resellers and their technical back-end providers.


Thanks

Jeff


From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 8:37 AM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RySG Supermajority view on Vertical Integration

All,

I wanted to forward around the RySG Supermajority statement on Vertical 
Integration in April 2009 (at the time of DAG 2 it was section 2.8).  For 
whatever reasons (which were not explained in the comments by staff or in the 
analysis of the comments), this was not presented as an option in DAG v.3.  We 
believe this option, however, should be analyzed by the PDP VI WG as it will 
analyze all of the other proposals that have been made, including those by 
staff.

Margie – Can you please make sure this is put on the wiki along with all of the 
other proposals and staff papers on the subject.

Thanks.

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
46000 Center Oak Plaza Sterling, VA 20166
Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: +1.703.738.7965 / 
jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>  / 
www.neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz/>
________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you have received this 
e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying 
of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message.