RE: [registrars] .ORG NC Task Force

[Elana Broitman <ebroitman@register.com>]

 i've been working with Ken, Bruce Tonkin, andScott to support Ken on the
TF,and would be pleased to continue that work through the registars' group.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D. Palage
To: Registrars@dnso.org
Sent: 1/10/02 3:45 PM
Subject: [registrars] .ORG NC Task Force

Ken:
 
Why was there not overwhelming support for that statement, who was
against it and who supported it. 
 
Section 5.1.2 of the .org agreement (
http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-org-25may01.
htm
<http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-org-25may01
.htm> ) states rather clearly "Registry TLD and neither it nor any
affiliated entity will be eligible to seek to continue to operate the
Registry TLD."
 
Now thinking outside of the box our friends at VRSN if they decided to
participate in .ORG would possibly try a combination of the following
tactics: (1) Under Section 5.12 VeriSign can be a sub-contractor for up
to 80% of the value of the Registry contract, i.e. non-profit entity,
backed by VeriSign registry and/or (2) non-profit entity backed by
either eNIC (.cc TLD operator) or dotTV (.tv TLD operator) registries
which were recently acquired by VeriSign.
 
Unlike in the past where we have been reactive, this constituency should
proactively protect the spirit and letter of the .ORG agreements. 
 
Anyone willing to serve on this Registrar Task Force as proposed in the
2002 Registrar Agenda that does not have a conflict of interest please
let me know.
 
Mike
 
 
 -----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Ken Stubbs
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:37 PM
To: Registrars@dnso.org
Subject: [registrars] additional BC comment on the "org" re-delegation



fellow registrars.....
 
the business constituency has recently forwarded this item to the task
force:  (see my additional comments below)
 
"The BC has always supported the introduction of greater competition in
the
provision of key gTLD Internet services and sees that such improved
competition would also add diversity and introduce new investment.
The suggested supplemental statement - with a minor enhancement - has
been
part of the BC position on .org divestiture and we would support its
communication to the Board.
Rather than seek to prolong the TF work in formulating a consensus
policy
recommendation for the NC to adopt and forward to the Board, it is BC's
expectation that the statement below will be part of our minority view
supplemental comments - unless of course there is overwhelming support
for
its inclusion in the full report!" 
 
"The Task Force would not, in the interest of increasing 
competition, DIVERSITY AND NEW INVESTMENT, wish to see the incumbent
dominant provider of gTLD registry services, Verisign, take an
interest in or contract to deliver critical services 
to the new management organization."

(note: there was not "overwhelming support" for inclusion of this item
in the TF report and, as a result,  this last minute policy position
will be separately communicated directly to the board by the business
constituency...) 
 
 
ken stubbs