Just now -- Icann board votes against EOI. Back to the drawing board. --c.a. Konstantinos Komaitis wrote: > I would also add to that (and apologies for coming in late) - there are > serious trademarks concerns that have not been really expressed. Like for > instance, will Time Warner be able to take .time? There needs to be some > form of legitimate restrictions as applied in trademark law. > > Konstantinos > > > On 09/03/2010 14:06, "Wendy Seltzer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Milton L Mueller wrote: >>> Hi, it would be nice to know more about what the rationale for this position >>> is. Not that I oppose it, it's just that the EoI proposal has been kicking >>> around since October and no one here has expressed any positions on it or >>> interest in it. Obviously you had a discussed there, please let us know what >>> you mean by a "pre-launch application" and I'd especially like to know how >>> you respond to one of the arguments I have heard in favor of the EoI >>> proposal: >>> - it provides information about what is really out there, thus providing a >>> counter to GAC and TM-lobby promoted FUD about all the problems a new TLD >>> round is likely to cause >> When the EoI becomes a mandatory declaration of intent to participate, >> combined with a serious financial commitment, without greater clarity of >> process from the ICANN side, it seems unfair to many who would like to >> participate. I'd rather channel that energy back into advancement of >> the actual gTLD introduction. >> >> --Wendy >> >> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: Non-Commercial User Constituency [[log in to unmask]] On >>> Behalf Of Wendy Seltzer [[log in to unmask]] >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 7:27 AM >>> To: [log in to unmask] >>> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCSG statement on the EoI >>> >>> The assembled NCSG in Nairobi agreed to endorse this statement regarding >>> Expressions of Interest: >>> >>> As it has been described here, the "Expression of Interest" is in fact a >>> "Pre-Launch Application" before ICANN is willing to make contractual >>> promises. The NCSG does not support a Pre-Launch Application under these >>> circumstances. >>> >>> -- >