ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-mapo]


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

[soac-mapo] RE: Note of GAC position on paying for objections

  • To: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>, "soac-mapo" <soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [soac-mapo] RE: Note of GAC position on paying for objections
  • From: "Frank March" <Frank.March@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 07:14:15 +1200

Hi Milton:
 
sovereignity in a word.  I am conveying my interpretation of what the
GAC would be likely to respond with based on discussion held in previous
GAC meetings.  I do not seek to justify but to inform.  
 
The discussion in the SOAC meeting turned to the purposes of the fee and
that is where some alternative suggestions for avoiding the requirement
started to appear
 
Best wishes, Frank
 
PS happy to have a detailed discussion of where I think the GAC is
likely to go in Vilnius if you like.  I take it you will be there?
 

----

Frank March

Senior Specialist Advisor

Digital Development

Energy and Communications Branch, Ministry of Economic Development

33 Bowen Street, PO Box 1473, WELLINGTON

Mobile: (+64) 021 494165

 


________________________________

        From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@xxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2010 4:01 a.m.
        To: Frank March; soac-mapo
        Subject: RE: Note of GAC position on paying for objections
        
        

        Frank,

        What is the rationale for the GAC's position that it shouldn't
have to pay an objector's fee? 

        I hope there is something more substantive to it than the idea
that "my group should get a free ride." 

        How would you require other groups to pay a fee and not a GAC
member? I don't get it. 

         

        --MM

         

        From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank March
        Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:47 AM
        To: soac-mapo
        Subject: [soac-mapo] Note of GAC position on paying for
objections

         

        I undertook during the meeting to circulate some text which
recognised the strongly held position of the GAC that no country should
be required to pay the objector's fee.  Subsequently the discussion
moved on to looking at what constituted a government for this purpose (I
suggested using the GAC definition for membership).  Then there was the
suggestion from Bertrand that GAC membership could be a requirement for
a no-fee objection by a government.  

         

        The discussion moved to the position of both the GAC and ALAC in
the objections process with the suggestion that either of these can
lodge an objection on behalf of a member.  Since the GAC requires
consensus this would necessarily overcome any concerns about 'frivolous'
objections coming from this source.  I suggest including a
recommendation along this line in our draft report.

         

        ----

        Frank March

        Senior Specialist Advisor

        Digital Development

        Energy and Communications Branch, Ministry of Economic
Development

        33 Bowen Street, PO Box 1473, WELLINGTON

        Mobile: (+64) 021 494165

         

        newzealand.govt.nz - connecting you to New Zealand central &
local government services 

________________________________

        Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those
of the Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files
transmitted with it are confidential and solely for the use of the
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person
responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, be advised that you
have received this message in error and that any use is strictly
prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the message and any
attachment from your computer. 

________________________________


newzealand.govt.nz - connecting you to New Zealand central & local government 
services

Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those of the 
Ministry of Economic Development. This message and any files transmitted with 
it are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you 
are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivery to the 
intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and 
that any use is strictly prohibited. Please contact the sender and delete the 
message and any attachment from your computer.


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy