[NA-Discuss] Comment on the .NET auto-renew and contract terms
evan at telly.org
Mon May 9 16:17:35 UTC 2011
We don't get around it. We can't.We have no effect on the GNSO.
But under the authority mandated in the ICANN bylaws, ALAC has the ability
-- arguably an obligation -- to communicate to the Boards directly when it
encounters ICANN activity that goes against the public good.
And in perfect bottom-up fashion, this is how it's supposed to work.
Discussions happening in the regions that percolate up to become global
assertions of the public interest. Especially in a case in which Avri and
Eric find common ground. :-)
I would fully support ALAC's escalation if it can be suitably informed of
the issues by those here who are knowledgeable on it.
On 9 May 2011 10:03, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> On 9 May 2011, at 09:46, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> > If there is anyone who wishes to go on record questioning the wisdom
> > of auto-renewal for Verisign's franchises, and/or ending monopoly in
> > the registry function, drop me a line today as comments close tomorrow.
> Not that we have a great record of working together, but I would be
> interested in seeing some telling and convincing comment made.
> My problem is that the contract itself and the contractual conditions
> recommended by the GNSO give a presumption of renewal (I argued against it
> in the Task Force but as usual, was not successful it getting it removed).
> How do we get around that?
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
Em: evan at telly dot org
More information about the NA-Discuss