Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Benefits of Cross Owenship - Presentation
- To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Benefits of Cross Owenship - Presentation
- From: Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 02:13:49 +1000
in simple terms, how does your control language vary from existing contracts?
On Apr 13, 2010, at 2:04 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> The language on control is actually in my proposal.
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
> Vice President, Law & Policy
> NeuStar, Inc.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Neuman, Jeff
> Cc: 'eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> 'Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx' <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Mon Apr 12 11:53:25 2010
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Benefits of Cross Owenship - Presentation
> You're making the same point you made earlier in an exchange of notes
> with Amadeu. If you would come up with something that could be cut and
> pasted into notes so that we could write about this bag of property
> rights, and what a "cap" might mean for each kind of property right in
> the bag, that could be helpful.
> In any event, I expect your remark means more to the position that a
> cap on something which is less than the whole of that something and
> greater than none of that something is useful, than to the positions
> of "none" (the Board in Resolution #5) and "all" (Jeff E.'s recently
> clarified position), as in either of those two extrema we don't need
> to be concerned with what's in the bag, as the bag is either
> completely absent, or completely present.