[PC-NCSG] [gnso-igo-ingo] Consensus and a minority stmt.

Wed Sep 18 12:33:31 EEST 2013

agreed - thanks for your work on this Avri.
Joy
On 18/09/2013 8:16 p.m., William Drake wrote:
> Not from me...a PDP on reserved names seems pretty obvious at this point.
>
> Bill
>
> On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Avri Doria <avri at ACM.ORG
> <mailto:avri at ACM.ORG>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Any objection to the minority statement being form the NCSG?
>>
>> avri
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: "Berry Cobb" <mail at berrycobb.com <mailto:mail at berrycobb.com>>
>>> Subject: RE: [gnso-igo-ingo] Consensus and a minority stmt.
>>> Date: 17 September 2013 17:06:41 EDT
>>> To: "'Avri Doria'" <avri at acm.org <mailto:avri at acm.org>>
>>> Cc: "Thomas Rickert" <rickert at anwaelte.de <mailto:rickert at anwaelte.de>>
>>>
>>> Hi Avri,
>>>
>>> Just for clarity on the minority statement below is this on your own
>>> behalf
>>> or that of the NCSG?
>>>
>>> Thank you.  B
>>>
>>> Berry Cobb
>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)
>>> 720.839.5735
>>> mail at berrycobb.com <mailto:mail at berrycobb.com>
>>> @berrycobb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org
>>> [mailto:owner-gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 01:56
>>> To: GNSO IGO INGO (gnso-igo-ingo at icann.org)
>>> Subject: [gnso-igo-ingo] Consensus and a minority stmt.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> Personally I accept the consensus determination made by Thomas.  I
>>> can also
>>> see the point that those who want the call changed on a few points.
>>>  Pretty
>>> much I am ambivalent on these points.  I think the results are a
>>> pity, but
>>> they are what they are.
>>>
>>> As most know, I strongly object to the addition of some many names
>>> to the
>>> reserved list.  I will not, however be posting a minority opinion on
>>> this, I
>>> accept that GAC has won this point despite the fact that this was
>>> unnecessary given the existence on objection and RPMs.
>>>
>>> I also strongly support waiving fees for IGO and INGO to use these
>>> objection
>>> and  RPM methods.  But will not file an minority statement on that
>>> either.
>>> I accept that ICANN is run by commercials interests and understand that
>>> their unwillingness to grant such waivers is another fact of life at
>>> ICANN
>>> at this point in time.  It is sad, but what are you going to.  A
>>> minority
>>> opinion that says we should be recognize  the financial constraints of
>>> service organizations would be lost in the hurly burly of massive profit
>>> making by all and sundry.
>>>
>>> It is posible that some others within the NCSG will file minority
>>> opinions,
>>> but I personally won't do so.
>>>
>>> I will however, file two minority statements:
>>>
>>> - one the nature of reserved names.  
>>> - one on the treatment of reserved names already registered by incumbent
>>> registries
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>> The following is my first draft of the minority statement on
>>> reserved names:
>>>
>>> There appears to be a consensus in the IGO-INGO WG to provide special
>>> protections for IGOs, INGO, the RCRC and even the IOC at the second
>>> level.
>>> While I beleive this is unfortunate, it does seem to be the
>>> accepted. This
>>> means that the reserved names list will grow exponentially by 1 or
>>> possibly
>>> 2 orders of magnitude.
>>>
>>> Buried within this increase in the size of the reserved name list is the
>>> recommendation for an exemption that would allow for these reserved
>>> names to
>>> be registered under some circumstances, such as by the organization
>>> to whom
>>> it is related or by someone who gets permission to register from the
>>> relevant IGO or IGNO.  
>>>
>>> I beleive that this notion of an exemption is a fertile ground for abuse
>>> that has not be adequately studied by this working group; I admit such a
>>> discussion is difficult.  I also beleive that any such exemption
>>> procedure
>>> essentially creates a new kind of reserved name that is not been
>>> adequately
>>> understood and for which there are no policy recommendations on how it
>>> should be implemented.
>>>
>>> My minority opinion is that exceptions for the registration of the
>>> reserved
>>> names be postponed until such time as there has been a PDP on
>>> reserved names
>>> and the process by which exceptions might be made.  In the meantime, my
>>> minority recommendation is that these names be treated as names
>>> currently on
>>> the reserved names are treated, i.e. the only way for such names to be
>>> registered as domain names, except for the few  at the second level is
>>> through the Registry Service Evaluation Process (RSEP) process.
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>> The following is the first draft of my minority statement on the
>>> treatment
>>> of reserved names already registered by incumbent registries
>>>
>>> The recommendations extend the expanded reserved names list to the
>>> incumbent
>>> registries.  Quite reasonably registrant who already have these
>>> names will
>>> be allowed to keep them and for any abuse to be handled under the
>>> enhanced
>>> RPMs as recommended by WG.  My minority view extends to what happens
>>> when
>>> the registrant of such a reserved names wishes to sell or otherwise
>>> transfer
>>> the name to another registrant. Allowing such a transfer goes
>>> against the
>>> nature of the reserved names list and opens an avenue for abuse.
>>>
>>> My recommendation is that all names added to the reserved names list  be
>>> blocked from sale/transfer to a new registrant at least until such
>>> time as a
>>> PDP on reserved names has considered the issue in the light of their
>>> possible changes to the nature of reserved names.
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org <mailto:PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org>
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
> **********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
>   ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
> william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
> (w), wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com> (h),
>   www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
> ***********************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130918/5ccefb2a/attachment-0001.html>