Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Regarding the Nairobi Board Resolution

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kurt,

The Working Group's list is probably as active as any list since the
turn of the century, comparable with the newdom and similar lists. I
don't envy your having to get sufficient context, depth and breadth to
engage, in the dialects of the members, which range from antitrust to
economics to gaming to pursuit of specific applications, spoken from
perspectives of more than a decade of IANA and ICANN policy experience
to less than a year of ICANN policy exposure, primarily in American
English and an American social framework.

After reflecting for a day I see how my questions contained advice for
the respondent, nominally Counsel, but also the Board, and equally
that answers would equally contain advice.

The answer to my first question will be eventually answered, if only
when applications are evaluated. Similarly, my second question too
will be eventually answered, at the same point in time. In fact, my
questions weren't very interesting to begin with.

The blank sheet of paper image is useful. It usually triggers writer's
block, or outbursts of momentary loquacity. It will take time to
develop a complete vertical integration, in the broadest sense, policy
picture on this single blank sheet. Within that time are the necessary
findings of fact and measured balances of policy goals, few of which
are present as the Working Group begins.

We can begin with what we believe we know, within the limits of our
collective confidence of our awareness of the relevant facts and our
balance of known policy goals. We can proceed step by step, from this
initial design on our presently blank sheet of paper, towards more
nuanced and complex problems, over time.

While we have nothing but the Board's position, I hope that the Board
will not defer "closing the DAG" and setting the dates for the
outreach program, and the date for the application acceptance, and
subsequent principle events, as the development of a vertical
integration policy will be incremental and continuous over several years.

I personally appreciate your offer to answer questions, but I think
you've hit upon the central point, that Staff cannot set policy, it
must originate from the consensus of the constituent groups.

Eric

On 5/12/10 2:19 PM, Kurt Pritz wrote:
> Members of the Vertical Integration Working Group:
> 
> This is the first contact I have had directly with you as a group – I
> want to start by thanking you for the interest and hard work put into
> the vertical integration issues. I have attended several of the calls
> and read the mail list. A tremendous amount of thought has been devoted
> to developing a vertical integration model for this new gTLD marketplace.
> 
> Some time ago, representatives of the group forwarded a set of questions
> to the ICANN Board regarding the Nairobi Board resolution on the
> vertical integration issue. The working group authored the set of
> specific questions to clarify the meaning of the resolution in order to
> inform the work of the group.
> 
> The Board discussed the questions posed by the group and considered a
> set of possible answers. In the end, the collective Board members’
> opinions indicated that the Board will not provide advice for your group
> in response to the questions.  The Board took note that the task set out
> for the GNSO – and through it, for the working group – was to develop a
> policy recommendation regarding the vertical structure of the name
> registration marketplace, starting with a “blank sheet of paper.“ The
> Board comments indicated that the resolution was crafted, in part, to
> give the GNSO the widest possible latitude in crafting a structure.
> 
> The Board also indicated that the next version of the proposed Guidebook
> and the gTLD implementation will be guided by the Nairobi Board
> resolution, unless superseded by a GNSO recommended, Board approved policy.
> 
> I realize some time has passed since the questions were originally posed
> and am gratified that the working group has continued to prosecute this
> task with all possible vigour. After considering this issue myself, I
> think the sense of the Board on this issue is correct. The policy advice
> on this issue should come from the consensus of the constituent groups,
> and should not be influenced by the input of the ICANN’s directors.
> 
> Again, please accept my thanks for the hard work to date and also my
> willingness to respond to questions or issues on any of the vertical
> integration discussion points.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 
> Kurt
> 
> Kurt Pritz
> ICANN