Sorry to be "systematic" (in some regions of Brazil, it means "crazy"), 
but I take advantage of yet another clever manipulation of the issue by 
the BC/IPR community to insist on NCUC discussing (and hopefully 
approving for submission to ICANN) my proposal of a temporary freeze on 
any gTLD move (new/deleg/redeleg) until an independent, qualified 
pluralist working group (far away from Washington) prepares a detailed 
report with recommendations.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

Milton Mueller wrote:

>Based on information supplied to me by our GNSO Council members, we learn that the Council is thinking of having a physical meeting in late February in Washington DC on new gTLDs. 
>
>Superficially, it appears that the Council is holding this meeting to "make progress on policy drafting" in a face to face meeting in order to be ready for the Wellington meeting. But take a closer look. 
>
>The meeting is also being held to "provide an opportunity for any additional public comment on the reports published so far." What that means, basically, is that it provides an opportunity for Washington-based business lobbies (i.e., intellectual property and BC) to come in and lobby the proceedings in force. And it puts the whole thing before a US government audience, just so we know who really calls the shots. 
>Naturally, the meeting was proposed by Marilyn Cade, who has altruistically volunteered to take charge of the arrangements. 
>
>There is really no excuse for this. 
>
>I urge our Council members to start raising tough questions about the alleged purpose of this proposed meeting. 
>
>Holding this meeting in Washington and accepting "public comment" turns this into a lobbying meeting that will easily be dominated by Washington insiders, the BC, IPC and incumbent registries, all of whom have good reasons to be hostile to new gTLDs. This is a transparent political ploy. What does this say to the people in Asia, Africa and Latin America and even Europe, that when the Council has to make a crucial decision it sets up shop in Washington with a month's notice and opens its doors to lobbyists? 
>
>If the Council really needs to have a f2f meeting to help it work out a common position, its members should get together as far away from Washington DC as possible, and they should keep ALL lobbying and pressure from interest groups as far away from them as possible!!!
>
>We have heard the same arguments for and against new gTLDs for years. We don't need more comment and lobbying. We need to make decisions. The idea that the council and its constituencies don't know what their position is, or need to hear more, is ridiculous. What needs to happen is for the various constituencies to put their heads together and come up with a common position. 
>
>
>  
>

-- 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Carlos Afonso
diretor de planejamento
Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
Rua Guilhermina Guinle, 272, 6º andar - Botafogo
Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brasil         CEP 22270-060
tel +55-21-2527-5494        fax +55-21-2527-5460
[log in to unmask]            http://www.rits.org.br
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++