[NA-Discuss] IMPORTANT: US Senate hearings on new gTLDs
avri at ella.com
Fri Dec 9 21:59:19 UTC 2011
Actually all members of the IPC voted in favor of the GNSO original recommendations having agreed to the consensus. It was only later that went to the Board looking for another bite of the apple: IRT, STI. And then when they did not get what they wanted from that consensus, the went to the governments for yet another bite of the apple.
What was approved and what has been carried on with ever since is the ICANN consensus agreement after everyone had had many, many, many opportunities to comments. Sure not everyone got what they wanted, e.g I want maximal protection for the linguistic commons and a prohibition on Trademark protection being applied to anything other than neologisims - but did not get what I wanted, but that is what it means to build a multistakeholder consensus from the bottom-up. No one gets everything they want. If that were the standard, nothing would ever be done.
So, no, it was not a 'power down consensus"
On 9 Dec 2011, at 15:39, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> So the NCUC was opposed. ALAC was opposed (see below). The GAC was opposed. The IPC was opposed, and clearly not appeased by the IRT and STI efforts. And the CADNA/ANA opposition indicates that either ICANN's business community was opposed, or that it is unrepresentative of the broader business community (perhaps because it is an umbrella that equally includes both domainers and Internet content providers.)
More information about the NA-Discuss