ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-newgtldapsup-wg]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [council] Motion for JAS WG charter extension

  • To: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [council] Motion for JAS WG charter extension
  • From: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 19:23:47 +0900

Hello everyone,

we discussed in the last call about this point and Wolf-Ulrich sent the
email below about removing 1.c , please send me your feedback .
Have nice and safe travel,

Regards

Rafik




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2010/12/2
Subject: [council] Motion for JAS WG charter extension
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



 All,

I'd like to amend the "Motion for JAS WG charter extension" as follows:

Remove "Resolved 1. c) Establishing a framework (for consideration
etcetera,) including a possible recommendation for a separate ICANN
originated foundation, for managing any auction income, beyond costs. for
future rounds and ongoing assistance;"

Rationale:

First, I'm convinced the community and ICANN have to be prepared how to
manage any potential new gTLD auction profit.
As usual in case profit is available one can expect many interested
community groups expressing their needs to share that profit where new
applicants are one group of it. In addition parts of the overall ICANN
program could also profit from that fund (e.g. outreach program, DNS
security etc.).

So my reservations to this topic being covered by the JAS group only are:
- it is a too large area for the JAS and would go far beyond their
originally intended scope
- there are lots of more urgent tasks for this WG as laid down in the new
draft charter. Handling the potential auction profit is of lower priority on
the timescale .
- as per definition the JAS view is applicant oriented that would cause an
imbalance

As I pointed out in former e-mails the JAS could express the new applicants'
general interest in taking part in the distribution of the potential auction
profit.

I suggest to initiate discussion on council level how to cover this topic
separately and appropriately.

I'm in agreement with all other items in the charter and would be happy if the
amendment could be accepted as friendly .

Save travels to Cartagena

Wolf-Ulrich


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy