Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] DIR-Final - Text to replace Exceptions, SRSU, and Compliance sections

[Antony Van Couvering <avc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

+100

On Jul 20, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Well here is a suggestion:
> 
> With one exception, i agree with the statement below.  
> 
> Perhaps we can submit this, and only this, as the whole of the report for the 
> WG.
> 
> I would not feel a need for a minority statement if this were the entire 
> report, as no one's favorite material is included to the exclusion of any 
> other material.
> 
> The only change I would recommend, given that people argue we do not know 
> what the SU really means in SRSU or the MU means in SRMU, that we substitute 
> Single Registrant (SR) for Single Registrant Single User (SRSU) - leaving 
> that discussion for another time.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> On 20 Jul 2010, at 14:33, Tim Ruiz wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> --Begin--
>> 
>> "It is impossible to know or completely understand all potential
>> business models that may be represented by new gTLD applicants. That
>> fact has been an obstacle to finding consensus on policy that defines
>> clear, bright line rules for allowing vertical integration and a
>> compliance framework to support it while ensuring that such policy is
>> practical and beneficial in the public interest. However, there is
>> general acceptance within the Working Group for the following:
>> 
>> 1. Certain new gTLDs likely to be applied for in the first round will be
>> unnecessarily impacted by restrictions on cross-ownership or control
>> between registrar and registry. 
>> 
>> 2. The need for a process that would allow applicants to request
>> exceptions and be considered on a case by case basis. The reasons for
>> exceptions and the conditions under which exceptions would be allowed,
>> varied widely in the group.
>> 
>> 3. The concept of Single Registrant Single User should be explored
>> further.
>> 
>> 4. The need for enhanced compliance efforts and the need for a detailed
>> compliance plan in relation to the new gTLD program in general."
>> 
>> -- End --
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Note to drafting-people -- please send me a
>> drop-in replacement for your sections by 2400 GMT
>> From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, July 20, 2010 12:35 pm
>> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> 
>> 
>> hi all (but especially you people on the hook for drafting),
>> 
>> please send me a "drop in replacement" of your deliverables by 2400 GMT
>> today -- my chances of accurately summarizing the email threads is nil.
>> :-)
>> 
>> so if you're doing a section, give me the drop in replacement for the
>> whole section (or Proposal, or Principal), rather than changes.
>> 
>> if you could do me one more favor... send it to me with "DIR-Final" in
>> the subject line, that will help me identify the version you really want
>> me to staple into the report draft. 
>> 
>> a last favor. if you've already sent it, please resend it with that
>> DIR-Final added to the subject line. i'd hate to get down to the wire
>> and discover that i've dropped in the wrong draft.
>> 
>> thanks!
>> 
>> mikey
>> 
>> 
>> - - - - - - - - -
>> phone 651-647-6109 
>> fax 866-280-2356 
>> web http://www.haven2.com
>> handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google,
>> etc.)
>> 
>> 
> 
>