Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: First Draft of VI Initial Report v.1

["Phil Buckingham" <pjbuckingham@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Perhaps it should read "it cannot be overstated ................ staffed and 
operationally ready  for the introduction of  hundreds of new gTLDs into the 
marketplace .

Milton, totally agree with your last two sentences 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Milton L Mueller 
  To: 'Margie Milam' ; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:44 PM
  Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: First Draft of VI Initial Report v.1


  A comment:

   

  The following statement, especially when taken in context, seems exaggerated 
and could be cut altogether: 

   

  "It cannot be overstated, based on public skepticism of historic enforcement 
challenges, that a new compliance and enforcement program should be in place, 
properly financed and staffed and operationally effective prior to changes that 
would open the door to potential anti-competitive conduct and abusive 
practices." 

   

  I don't think there is wide consensus on this statement. One of my key 
concerns here is the words "prior to changes that would open the door"  - this 
allows those who might be using "compliance" as a delaying or FUD tactic to 
claim always that we can't move forward because the proper mechanisms are not 
in place yet. In fact, compliance capabilities and techniques will always have 
to evolve in tandem with the implementation of new TLDs. As a practical matter 
we have to define the policy, start to implement it, and then at the same time 
calibrate our compliance and enforcement capabilities.

   

   

   

  From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Margie Milam
  Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:24 PM
  To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
  Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] First Draft of VI Initial Report v.1
  Importance: High

   

  Dear All,

   

  In preparation for the call VI call tomorrow,  please find attached the First 
Draft of the Initial Report for your review and consideration.    

   

  As you review this Draft, please note that:

   

  ·         Due to the size of the document (currently over 90 pages!)  I have 
excluded the annexes and provide only the text of the report.   

  ·         The SRSU description is especially thin and needs further content 
from IPC representatives and from NCSG representatives.    

  ·         Please disregard any formatting issues as I will be doing a more 
thorough review of the document as it becomes more final.

  ·         Once the results of the poll are in,  someone will need to draft 
content with any observations that to be included in Section 6. 

   

  Unfortunately, I will not be on tomorrow's call, but Marika will manage the 
call in my absence.    I will be in an all-day meeting in MDR, and will follow 
up with Marika after the VI call.

   

  Best regards,

   

  Margie

   

  ____________

   

  Margie Milam

  Senior Policy Counselor

  ICANN

  ____________