Comments on Registry Agreement Amendments

[Jon Nevett <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

ICANN has proposed that New TLD registry agreements should have a new amendment 
procedure that is not contained in the existing registry agreements.  The 
Registries Constituency argues that the current amendment process is 
sufficient, but has offered to establish a new requirement for good faith 
negotiations at the request of either party to the agreement.  

For issues inside the so-called picket fence and those related to security and 
stability issues, I agree with the Registries Constituency.  There is no need 
for a new amendment process on top of the three that already exist -- agreement 
between the registry and ICANN; Consensus Policies through community Policy 
Development Process; and Temporary Policies established unilaterally by a 
two-thirds vote of the ICANN Board.  The current amendment scheme works well 
and provides the community with the ability to provide input to potential 
changes to the registry agreements.  Granting ICANN the ability to unilaterally 
change the agreement beyond a Temporary Policy or instituting a new mechanism 
for changes that already are covered by Consensus Policy or Temporary Policy is 
unnecessary and would violate ICANN's commitment to bottom up, multi 
stakeholder, and transparent policymaking.

For issues outside of the picket fence and outside of the Consensus Policy or 
Temporary Policy procedures, there may be some benefit in a new amendment 
procedure to assist with scalability and consistency among registry agreements. 
 Such a new procedure should not -- in any way -- grant ICANN the ability to 
unilaterally amend the registry agreement.  Rather, it should be a fair process 
that includes consensus support from the registry community, as well as input 
from the rest of the community.  Moreover, the subject matters of any new 
procedure should be limited and specifically outlined in the registry 
agreement.  Some issues, such as registry fees to ICANN, the scope of Consensus 
and Temporary Policies, the term of the agreement, and the subject matters 
covered by Consensus and Temporary Policies should be specifically exempt.  

We have had a public consultation on this issue and have discussed it as a 
community for over a year.  It is time to make a decision.

Jonathon Nevett
President, Domain Dimensions, LLC