[NA-Discuss] Public Comment on the .NET auto-renew, proposed contract extension for multiple technical providers

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Olivier,

Thank you for taking these steps.

In the draft I circulated, and subsequently submitted as two comments, 
I addressed only competition policy issues.

There are other public interest problems present in the proposed .NET 
agreement negotiated between ICANN Legal staff and Verisign GRS Legal 
staff, and I don't suggest these are not also important to consider, 
and express an advisory position upon.

Danny Younger privately communicated another interesting issue, the 
GNSO PDP may never have formally reached the conclusion that registry 
agreements shall be presumptively renewed. As the .NET agreement 
relies explicitly upon the presumption that the GNSO PDP did reach 
such a conclusion, this too is a problem, not only for competition 
policy reasons, but for transparency and accountability reasons.

In addition, there are features in the proposed .NET agreement which 
propose substantive changes which have alarmed many.

I simply picked the competition policy as a problem upon which there 
is a public interest position.

The comments I submitted are available at:

http://forum.icann.org/lists/net-agreement-renewal/msg00009.html

and

http://forum.icann.org/lists/net-agreement-renewal/msg00010.html

Eric