ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-vi-feb10]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Question to WG on RAA

  • To: Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Question to WG on RAA
  • From: "David W. Maher" <dmaher@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:47:37 -0500

This is not a "legal" proceeding. The whole point of the GNSO renewal is to create a structure in which the parties can attempt to build consensus.
That is what we should be trying to do.
 David Maher
Chair, RySG


At 01:51 PM 3/30/2010, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
As for the past process, this was not a negotiation with one side having to concede points to the other and should not be thought of that way. If it was, then the two parties to the negotiation would be able to jointly make a decision after they reached a compromise, which we know was never an option. I am not a lawyer, but I would think when you are trying to make your case to a 3rd party that decides , you plead your case as hard as you can and hope to win. This was the status of the world we were living in before the Board decision, but now we are in a PDP, so lets work within that world.



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy