RE: [bc-gnso] Who we are

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree, domain name portfolio management isn't a BC issue per se./I think John 
is 'brainstorming' and we will just gather ideas and actually discuss different 
ideas later/I would add SSR, for instance.....   and yes, I will put in a 
discussion about accountability of officers/councilors, including the duties to 
participate, consult, etc. 




> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 19:27:27 +0100
> Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Who we are
> From: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
> To: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> CC: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx; bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> I hope the proposal that the Bc mission is rewritten to promite domain
> portflio management was a joke.
> 
> Here's another one. What exactly is our councillor recall procedure ????
> 
> Philip
> 
> 
> >  Marilyn,
> > As we consider a rewrite of the Business Constituency's mission to better
> > reflect who we are, we might begin with a review of the self-descriptors
> > used in the round of introductions at our meeting with the new ICANN
> > finance team.  The characteristics fell in two bucket:
> > To prevent:
> > FraudBrand abuseMalwarePhishingCybersquattingBarriers to e.commerce
> >
> > To promote:
> > Domain portfolio managementTechnology architectureRisk
> > managementInnovationEfficiencySecurityEasier e.commerceIP rightsTrademarks
> > From this, we can build a case for membership in the BC that may resonate
> > with companies.
> > Just some raw material for consideration.
> > Berard
> >
> 
>