Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
"Some critics fear that this perversion
of dot-org is a covert attempt by the Intellectual Property crowd to thwart the future
establishment of 'protest' sites, such as ACME-WIDGETS-SUCK.ORG.
Nonsense, scoff ICANN officials. "[T]he future of .org are policy decisions
that should go through the consensus process," wrote Joe Sims, a lawyer working for
ICANN that drafted the contract language. Sclavos’
[Verisign CEO] letter does acknowledge that are "issues to be determined" in handing
over .org — implying that nothing is set in stone. ICANN, however, has already agreed
that "at a minimum" current .org owners should be allowed to keep their Web sites
"for one renewal cycle."
Simple question to ICANN:Has the "agreement" referred
to in the last paragraph been part of a "consensus process" (para.2)?