RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Proposal & ccTLDs

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Volker,

Often is has been noted that ccTLDs operate without consumer harm, but
(while I don't know this as fact and welcome others to confirm or clarify)
it appears to me that most ccTLDs have significant government oversight or
are run by governments, academic institutions or not-for-profits.  I am
aware that some smaller nations have outsourced and contracted operations to
commercial entities, but the larger measure is as noted above.  If I am
correct in my understanding, it is understandable that there has been less
harm in that group of TLD operators and thus the argument about ccTLDs is,
in fact, not a supporting one for VI.

If I am incorrect, I welcome corrections to my understanding.

Thanks,

RA

Ronald N. Andruff
RNA Partners, Inc.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Volker Greimann
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 6:27 AM
To: Jeff Eckhaus
Cc: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Proposal


While this proposal may be a step in the right direction, especially 
when considering the new additions for RSPs, I see it lacking in many 
respects. The blind focus of the 15% limit as a fix-all without 
addressing any of the perceived harms should be seen as what it is: 
simple protectionism of the interests of current providers by keeping 
registrars from the registry market. 

I therefore propose to reintroduce the most crucial exception of the JN2 
proposal: allowing Registrars to act as Registries provided they agree 
not to sell or resell their own TLD, especially in the case of community 
TDs. Please bear in mind that many ccTLDs operate successfully and 
without consumer harm selling their own TLDs, so we registrars are 
already making a huge concession here, in fact this is the line I will 
not be able go beyond.

Please also define the term structural seperation. Will it require 
seperate executive staff, support staff, or seperation of system? Any 
such seperation will drive up the price of operations. While I agree 
that financial seperation makes absolute sense, I do not see this for 
structural seperation of it means what I think it does.

It is lacking a policy review procedure, which is needed to ease up the 
requirements in the light of experience.



Volker
> One question -  does this proposal restrict a Registrar  from
participating in the gTLD round as an applicant? 
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jon Nevett
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 11:57 AM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] New Proposal 
>
>
> VI WG Colleagues:
>
> Here is a very high level proposal that is coming out of our subgroup
conversations (not every member of the subgroup supports)
>
> We are looking for a catchy name -- any ideas?  (nothing offensive Milton)
>
>
> New Proposal
>
> **15% restriction going both ways, including resellers and Registry
Service Providers (Back-end technical service providers) regardless of TLD
-- taken from RACK
>
> **Exception for Single Registrant Single User for corporate use only --
(sub group believed that exception was not necessary as registry schedule of
reserved names already provides for this, but good to have in contract for
clarity) -- mostly taken from JN2
>
> **Exception for back-end (RSP) IF a) RSP doesn't control registry or its
policy, pricing and registrar selection; b) there is structural separation
between RSP function and affiliated registrar function; AND c) RSP has
direct contract with ICANN requiring data
security/confidentiality/structural separation with graduated sanctions
including de-accreditation for any violations -- new idea
>
> **Use of registrars required; registry may select based on objective
criteria; Non Discrimination & Equal Access for registrars selected -- taken
from JN2
>
> **Group continues work on Single Registrant Multiple User and
Community/Orphan exceptions -- not necessary to be in place at time of final
AG
>
>
> Looking forward to discussing on Thursday.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jon
>
>   


--

Fur Ruckfragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfugung.

Mit freundlichen Grusen,

Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -

Key-Systems GmbH        Prager Ring 4-12                            Web:
66482 Zweibrucken                           www.key-systems.net
<http://www.key-systems.net/>
Tel.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 50               www.domaindiscount24.com
<http://www.domaindiscount24.com/>
Fax.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 51               www.ISPproxy.net
<http://www.ispproxy.net/>
Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.rrpproxy.net/>

Geschaftsfuhrer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr..: HR B 1861 - Zweibruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534

Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur fur den angegebenen
Empfanger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisnahme, Veroffentlichung oder
Weitergabe durch Dritte ist unzulassig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht fur
Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder
telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.

-- 

Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,

Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -

Key-Systems GmbH
Prager Ring 4-12
DE-66482 Zweibruecken
Tel.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 85
Fax.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 61
Email: jpfeiffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com

Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.key-systems.net/facebook
www.twitter.com/key_systems

CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 1861 - Zweibruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534

This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it
is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this
email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an
addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify
the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.