Thanks Tapani for sharing.
____
REMMY NWEKE, Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd [*Multiple-award winning medium*]
(DigitalSENSE Business News
<http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng/businessnews>; ITREALMS
<http://www.itrealms.com.ng>, NaijaAgroNet <http://www.naijaagronet.com.ng>)
Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza, Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms
<http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
<https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
NDSF 2016
<https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153112418861429&set=a.119216361428.104226.716351428&type=1>
_________________________________________________________________
*Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Tapani Tarvainen <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I think this merits wider audience than just the Policy Committee list
> where Ed posted it. The DomainIncite article is worth reading, too:
>
>
> http://domainincite.com/19450-odd-couple-coalition-wants-urs-deleted-from-legacy-gtld-contracts
>
> We can indeed be more effective by cooperating with other groups when
> interests coincide, however bitterly we may disagree with them at
> other times. Good work, Ed!
>
> Tapani
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]> -----
>
> Hi everybody,
>
>
> I wanted to let everyone know that the URS related Reconsideration
> Request was submitted last night. It can be found here:
>
>
>
> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reconsideration-15-19-icann-business-c
> onstituency-ncsg-2015-10-13-en
>
> I want to thank everyone for your help and support on this, both in Buenos
> Aires with the public comments and on this Reconsideration Request itself.
> I recognise the submitted Reconsideration Request is rather long, the
> inevitable result of having Phil and I do something like this, and is a
> result of a lot of compromise and a lot of back and forth. Amr was
> certainly correct in pointing out several of the defects of the Request: it
> would be a much different document if we had done one independently.
> Nevertheless, I do believe we are going to force the Board to respond to
> these core concerns:
>
> 1. That staff usurped the GNSO policy development process n the .CAT,
> .TRAVEL and.PRO renewals,
>
> 2. That the Board let them do so without even admonishing staff for using
> the new RPM's as the starting point for contractual negotiations on
> renewals of legacy gTLD's, and
>
> 3. That the Board was derelict in not investigating whether the renewal
> contracts were truly the result of even handed bilateral negotiations.
>
> I should note that some of what appears to be diversions within the
> Request actually represent some positioning we had to do so that: 1. both
> groups had standing to file the Request and 2. the Request met other
> qualifications for consideration. The Board will only reconsider it's
> decision under certain specified conditions. You can't simply ask them to
> think again about what they did, despite the mechanisms name. We shouldn't
> have any problem getting this accepted.
>
> I want to thank both Phil Corwin and Steve DelBianco of the BC for their
> professionalism and fine work in this matter. There were things in this
> Request their members were not comfortable with or happy about. We tried to
> work together to address some of those concerns but in some cases we
> weren't able to find an answer, and to their credit Phil and Steve did not
> lose sight of why we were doing this together. A RR filed by the commercial
> and noncommercial communities together is far more powerful than separate
> RR's done by each group. When we can work with other groups without
> sacrificing our core principles and beliefs I do believe it's in our
> interest and in the interest of our members to do so. Indeed, the industry
> press seems a bit bemused by our joint filing:
>
>
> http://domainincite.com/19450-odd-couple-coalition-wants-urs-deleted-from-legacy-gtld-contracts
>
> Safe travels to all heading for Dublin.
>
> Best,
>
> Ed
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
|
