RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration

[<jarkko.ruuska@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

I agree with Richard. At least SRSUs are the kind of exceptions *almost* 
everyone supports.

BR,

-jr
-----Original Message-----
From: ext Richard Tindal
Sent:  27.09.2010, 23:10
To: vertical integration wg
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration



This breaches GNSO Implementation Principle 1 regarding predictability for 
applicants

I think the only Exceptions with any sort of Support (but not Consensus) are 
TLDs that:

1.  (a) Are 'Community',  (b) are small and (c) have no market power;  and

2.  SRSUs.

RT


On Sep 27, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:

i just ran out of daylight and need to get on the call.  here's a redraft from 
the last few emails.  Roberto, i was trying to frame your bullet and failed, so 
that one is missing and needs to be added.

mikey

revised...

-- Certain new gTLDs likely to be applied for in the first round may be 
unnecessarily impacted by restrictions on cross-ownership or control between 
registrar and registry.

-- There is need for a process that would allow applicants to request 
exceptions and have them considered on a case-by-case basis.  Possible 
exceptions include (but are not limited to):

-- Single Registrant, Single User TLDs

-- TLDs that would benefit from relevant local, technical and commercial 
expertise

-- There will exist need for enhanced compliance efforts and the need for a 
detailed compliance plan in relation to the new gTLD program in general.


On Sep 27, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

Not bad, Mikey!
I like the first point and think it is supported by the GAC statement as well.
Could we strengthen the third point – I think SRSU had enough support from all 
sides to say something stronger than “explored further” – more like “A 
significant part of the demand for new gTLDs may come from SRSU TLDs and any 
exceptions policy should allow for them”


From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 11:51 AM
To: vertical integration wg
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board resolution on Vertical Integration

just checking...

here's a starter-kit of bullet points that we might be able to put into a 
consensus statement;

-- Certain new gTLDs likely to be applied for in the first round may be 
unnecessarily impacted by restrictions on cross-ownership or control between 
registrar and registry.

-- There is need for a process that would allow applicants to request 
exceptions and have them considered on a case-by-case basis.

-- The concept of Single Registrant, Single User TLDs should be explored 
further.

-- There will exist need for enhanced compliance efforts and the need for a 
detailed compliance plan in relation to the new gTLD program in general.

that's an ever-so-slightly edited version of the principles list...

i think there are two areas of consensus -- 1) the need for exceptions and 2) 
the importance of capable compliance.

mikey



- - - - - - - - -
phone  651-647-6109
fax   866-280-2356
web  http://www.haven2.com<http://www.haven2.com/>
handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)