RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs!
All, I have attempted to update the spreadsheet with the points from the original DM proposal, but wanted to add that this was a proposal, not the current standing on all points and issues. I think this is an important point people need to understand. The original idea was to put together the proposals in a spreadsheet, not what everyone's current outlook is and what they would agree to. I also wanted to point out that the cell that asked for the "emphasis" point was something that we did not specifically propose but feel needs to be emphasized since it is a critical factor in open competition in the TLD space. I will use the words from the JN2 proposal since it captures the idea best "Registry Operator or its Affiliate can co-own an ICANN-Accredited Registrar in a TLD other than the TLD for which Registry Operator or its Affiliate serves as the Registry" Jeff Eckhaus -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:31 AM To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs! Attached is updated for Go Daddy's proposal. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs! From: berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26 am To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx VIWG, I took the liberty to make some formatting and spell check changes to the matrix. Hopefully this will make it a bit easier to read. Thanks. Berry Cobb Infinity Portals LLC berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.infinityportals.com 866.921.8891 From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 6:13 AM To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] OUR WG TABLE - For Final Inputs! All, This is it, the moment you have been waiting for - the New VI WG Table. It needs your help! I reviewed and revised a few table categories with those who had suggestions on our last call (special tx to Jon N). Now, it is your turn. If you/your company/your constituency submitted a proposal, **please review the table and update it with your ideas, your conclusions, your words.** Updates should go to the whole group, or to me and Mikey (both, please) by ** Sunday morning**. There are new categories for clearer understanding of Equal Access and Ry/Rr structure proposed in the exceptions. Added/Revised: Column G: Ry must accept (1) all IA Rrs (gTLD model) OR (2) may select among IA Rrs based on special, objective criteria (sponsored TLD model) Column H: Non-Discrimination Among Rrs (Technology, Customer Support, Etc) Column L: Under threshold: (1) Ry may distribute directly (subject to RAA-type obligations) OR (2) Ry may co-own a Rr > 15% to distribute TLD Column M: Equal Access Required Below Threshold? Otherwise, it?s the same. Tx for filling it in (you don?t want to rely on me ? I wrote one of the proposals!) Best, Kathy Kleiman Director of Policy .ORG The Public Interest Registry 1775 Wiehle Avenue, Suite 200 Reston, Virginia 20190 USA Main: +1 703 889-5778 | Direct: +1 703 889-5756 Mobile: +1 703 371-6846 | Fax: +1 703.889.5779 E: kkleiman@xxxxxxx | W: www.pir.org Visit us online! Check out events & blogs at .ORG Buzz! Find us on Facebook | dotorg See the .ORG Buzz! Photo Gallery on Flickr See our video library on YouTube CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: Proprietary and confidential to .ORG, The Public Interest Registry. If received in error, please inform sender and then delete.