Robin Gross wrote:
> ICANN staff has (again) thrown out the consensus of the community in the Re=
> c6 Working Group on Morality & Public Order of new gtlds and decided to ins=
> titute its own policy - one concerned only with "risk management" to ICANN =
> (i.e. cheap insurance & lawsuits).  So all of the important public interest=
>  points that NCSG and ALAC were able to get into the policy have been unila=
> terally thrown out by staff.  Even Leibovitch from ALAC has written a good =
> summarization of this tragedy - see below.    We'll need to dust-off the ca=
> mpaign equipment on this issue.   It is huge: a gigantic power grab by ICAN=
> N policy staff against the entire community.

So, does the EC have a recommendation about where we go from here? I would 
expect that NCSG has strong common interests with ALAC here and should work 
closely with them on formulting a response.

I don't recall any significant disagerement amongst NSCG members on the 
inappropriateness of the MAPO provisions as originally statyed and therefore 
as now imposed by the ICANN staff. Given that, it's a matter of process 
rather than message that we need to decide and given that it would probably 
be easiuer for the EC to make a proposal in consultation with ALAC.

I want to help but am not sure what the best action is to help.

-- 
Professor Andrew A Adams                      [log in to unmask]
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/