NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 10:36:58 -0400
Reply-To:
Wendy Seltzer <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From:
Wendy Seltzer <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
As Chuck Gomes has pointed out, we should be objecting to the "temporary
registration block" as described in paragraph 2, and communicated in 3b.

I support the rejection.

--Wendy

On 09/27/2012 09:56 AM, Andrew A. Adams wrote:
> I support this statement.
> 
> -----
> 
> The NCSG rejects the 3b "temporary registration block." defined in IOC/IFRC 
> Drafting Team' recommendation for a number of reasons:
> 
> 1. Policy recommendations from the GNSO on reserved names can only be made by 
> a PDP that is properly constituted and is run according to the process rules 
> as established in the ICANN by-laws.
> 
> 2. This drafting team continues to circumvent proper process by attempting to 
> make policy as opposed to performing its proper function of fact gathering 
> and presenting information to the council that can be used in deciding on the 
> viability and charter for such a PDP.
> 
> The NCSG supports the PDP only on the condition that among the possible 
> outcomes is the current status quo, no protection at the second level. We 
> support the PDP as the only appropriate place to resolve this proposal among 
> competing proposals. We believe it is illegitimate to change reserved name 
> policy,,,,, no matter how it is euphemistically named, before the PDP runs 
> its course.
> 
> The NCSG is also aware of other types of humanitarian organization that also 
> demand these privileges and we feel that any discussion on granting such 
> special reservations must include a full discussion of all who request such 
> reservations.
> 
> Finally the NCSG does not believe that the reserved name list can be used 
> solely for the purpose of new gTLDs, and that any decisions on adding names 
> to the reserved list must take incumbent registries into account.
> 
> 
> ------
> 


-- 
Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask] +1 617.863.0613
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
Visiting Fellow, Yale Law School Information Society Project
http://wendy.seltzer.org/
https://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2