[NA-Discuss] A comment on the Andruff Bundling Letter

Avri Doria avri at ella.com
Mon May 23 19:09:49 UTC 2011


I think the pressure on the staff on this particular issue is umisplaced.  Until such time as the Board overrules the GNSO Policy position that there is a 1:1 relationship between applications and strings, there is nothing the staff can do.


On 23 May 2011, at 14:43, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:

> Colleagues,
> Ron Andruff has written a response to my comment which the list 
> software bounced has he's not a subscriber to the na-discuss list.
> It appears below.
> Eric
>> Subject:
>> RE: A comment on the Andruff Bundling Letter
>> From: "Ron Andruff" <randruff at rnapartners.com>
>> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 14:05:00 -0400
>> To: "'Eric Brunner-Williams'" <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net>, <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>> Eric,
>> Thank you for your reasoned analysis.  In response I can say that I share
>> your apprehension that 'competition policy concerns remain unaddressed', but
>> believe that those issues can be addressed ONCE the critical issue of
>> bundling is on the table.  Until we can get staff to at least look at this
>> deficiency, the cards are stacked against those applicants that wish to
>> serve end-users' needs simply because budgets will constrain them.
>> It should be well-noted that the current AGB allows any entity that has
>> multiples of USD 185,000 to apply for multiples of the same string in other
>> scripts/languages.  This makes no sense, as you well point out.
>> Kind regards,
>> RA
>> Ronald N. Andruff
>> RNA Partners, Inc.
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list