I agree with Milton with the slight amendment -- it is not "a statement of opinion by one stakeholder group" it is "a statement of opinion by a subset of a stakeholder group."
Paul
Paul Rosenzweig
[log in to unmask]
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684
-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L
Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: two letter domain names and GAC
To put it more bluntly, under the bylaws if a GAC statement is not consensus advice it is not advice at all. It is a statement of opinion by one stakeholder group and triggers no special obligation.
> -----Original Message-----
>
> I do not think that that Board can ignore any advice it gets. Non
> consensus GAC advice is like any other advice the Board gets from an
> AC, something to be considered that does not invoke the specific bylaws mechanisms.
>
> It is also important to remember that the Board can reject any advice
> it gets, including GAC consensus advice after going through the bylaws
> process. Even GAC consensus advice does not need to be accepted,
> though it takes more energy in the consideration. GAC consensus advice
> may command a process, but it does not command decisions or policy.
>
> And the better NCSG and others argue for rejecting inappropriate
> advice, the better chance there is that any types of advice can be
> overcome when necessary. I think that the Board can better stand up
> to inappropriate advice when it has strong well founded arguments to the contrary.
>
> Another point I have discovered, no issue is ever over. No victory is
> ever sealed forever. Every group at ICANN can remain persistent in
> its goals, so those who win or lose a point will always be able to
> come back around with a new argument a new approach. It seems to be in the nature of the beast.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 30-Jun-17 15:50, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
> >
> > I agree completely with Frazaneh. This is a) a terrible idea on the
> > merits; b) a harbinger of GAC efforts to control ICANN; and c) a
> > signal that the Board will not stand up to the GAC, since the GAC
> > “advice” on this is not advice that the Board must consider (lacking
> > consensus) but they have chosen to do so anyway instead of ignoring
> > the GAC. All in all it.really.sucks ….. and the GNSO/NCSG community
> > should say so loudly, repeatedly and often.
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul Rosenzweig
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >
> > O: +1 (202) 547-0660
> >
> > M: +1 (202) 329-9650
> >
> > VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
> >
> > www.redbranchconsulting.com <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/>
> >
> > My PGP Key:
> >
> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066
> 68
> > 4
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On
> Behalf
> > Of *farzaneh badii
> > *Sent:* Friday, June 30, 2017 9:33 AM
> > *To:* [log in to unmask]
> > *Subject:* two letter domain names and GAC
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I wrote about two-letter domain names around a year ago
> > http://www.internetgovernance.org/2016/08/26/another-government-land
> > -
> g
> > rab-in-the-name-space/
> >
> >
> >
> > It seems like some in GAC do not back off on this issue and now I
> > found out that there will be a task force on this issue according
> > to GAC communique.
> >
> >
> >
> > 1. 2-Character Country Codes at the Second Level With respect to
> > the 2-Character Country Codes at the Second Level GAC Copenhagen
> > Communiqué Advice (para VI.4), the GAC;
> > a) welcomes and appreciates the decision made by ICANN Board
> > directing the President and CEO of ICANN or his designee(s) to
> > take necessary actions for satisfactory resolution of the concerns
> > raised in that Advice;
> >
> > and b) welcomes the announcement made by the President and CEO of
> > ICANN of his intention to create a task force to resolve the
> > concerns mentioned in the above communiqué. In this regard the GAC
> > proposes that the mandate and working methods of the above
> > mentioned Task Force be determined in consultation with GAC
> > leadership and GAC members, and other interested parties.
> >
> >
> >
> > We have to be on this task force. There is no legitimate reason for
> > governments to claim ownership over pronouns and other generic two
> > letter domain names. Do I need permission from Italy to register
> > it.sucks? Also I am uneasy that they created a task force which
> > relates to generic names (pronouns, remember) and GNSO is not even
> > mentioned.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Best
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Farzaneh
> >
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
|
