Extract from joint NSI-ICANN statement 3/1/01:
(http://www.icann.org/melbourne/proposed-verisign-agreements-topic.htm)"The
original purpose of this provision was to create an incentive for the separation
of ownership of NSI's registry and registrar businesses"
Extract from existing
ICANN-NSI Registry Agreement:
(http://www.icann.org/nsi/nsi-registry-agreement-04nov99.htm)
"The
Expiration Date shall be four years after the Effective Date, unless extended as
provided below. In the event that NSI completes the legal separation of ownership
of its Registry Services business from its registrar business by divesting all the
assets and operations of one of those businesses within 18 months after Effective
Date to an unaffiliated third party that enters an agreement enforceable by ICANN
and the Department of Commerce (i) not to be both a registry and a registrar in the
Registry TLDs, and (ii) not to control, own or have as an affiliate any individual(s)
or entity(ies) that, collectively, act as both a registry and a registrar in the
Registry TLDs, the Expiration Date shall be extended for an additional four years,
resulting in a total term of eight years."
Extract from Scribe's Notes of DNSO
Names Council Meeting 3/11/01:
(http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/icann/melbourne/archive/scribe-icann-031101-nc.html)
Schneider:
Concerned that Board and NC became involved in this process so late. That Verisign
is no longer to divest the registry is a major shift in policy; it needs to be discussed
seriously before being approved.
Sims: To my knowledge, ICANN Board has never
adopted a policy requiring separation of registrar and registry.
Comment:
Mr
Sims: whether or not the scribe recorded actual use by you of the word "requiring",
this was a misleading answer which rather than address the question, attempted to
undermine it. Your technical defense when the suggestion was made that the new policy/intention
"needs to be discussed seriously" has been noted.