| Gene Marsh anycastNET gTLD (5/25/99 2:03:51 PM, #142) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Who were the 4 participants? |
| Mikki Barry DNRC gTLD (5/25/99 2:06:30 PM, #143) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I find it amusing that it seems surprising to those who blocked the addition of new gTLDs that the one gTLD would have 3 names council seats. |
| Kent Crispin songbird (5/25/99 2:07:13 PM, #144) (Message has been read to the assembled group) If the purpose of the constituencies is not numerical, then there does not need to be 3 representatives |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET gTLD (5/25/99 2:08:16 PM, #145) (Message has been read to the assembled group) How will there be adequate and appropriate representation of differing opinions in the model Don is proposing? |
| Peter de Blanc VI ccTLD Admin ccTLD position (5/25/99 2:09:20 PM, #146) (Message has been read to the assembled group) So far- no mention of RFC's 1591, etc continuing to govern admin of ccTLDs . Many ccTLDs have stated support of the continuation of RFC 1591 |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET gTLD (5/25/99 2:11:42 PM, #147) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Where is there a definition of constituency which states that only an existing gTLD may be a constituent for a gTLD DNSO? |
| Kevin Boyle gTLD, 3 appointments - 1 company (5/25/99 2:13:01 PM, #148) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I also find one company with 3 seats on the names council disturbing. There are other entities interested in forming constituencies that were not able to be present. Can there be other entities added after Berlin? |
| Mikki Barry DNRC commercial constituency (5/25/99 2:18:26 PM, #149) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Jon Englund has been VERY active in the intellectual property field. To have him as a name council member in the commercial constituency unfairly increases the power of the intellectual property group across the DNSO. |
| Jeff Williams INEG. INC. ICANN's restricting formation of Constituencies (5/25/99 2:21:30 PM, #150) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Esther and the ICANN INterim Board, Why last week on the IFWP mailing list was a sudden announcment that formation of DNSO constituency groups linited? What authority does ICANN have from arbitrarly liiting the formation of constituency groups? How does doing so meet the requirnments of the White Paper with respect to Openess and Transparency? |
| Kevin Boyle gTLD (5/25/99 2:28:34 PM, #151) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The names of the 4 people present were spoken in the meeting room but Esther did not repeat them so they were not heard over the net. Who were they, please? |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET Registrar (5/25/99 2:38:13 PM, #152) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Is constituency limited to existing "registrars"? |
| Mikki Barry DNRC inclusion (5/25/99 2:38:47 PM, #153) (Message has been read to the assembled group) If ICANN is truly going to be a body that encourages diversity, constituencies should be focusing on inclusion rather than narrow definitions of who is allowed to join what constituency and who has a vote. Barbara Dooley's group seems to have done that. I haven't heard the others making the attempt for inclusion. |
| kent crispin songbird definition of registrar (5/25/99 2:42:49 PM, #154) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The issue is: does ICANN (through it's contractual requirements) have a problem with small registrars? That is, the problem is not with the requirement that registrars be licensed; the problem is that the licensing requirements are high. |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET Registrar (5/25/99 2:47:19 PM, #155) (Message has been read to the assembled group) With the understanding that ICANN's objective is to "offer broad participation and a variety of views" [E. Dyson], is ICANN willing to consider an additional gTLD constituency? The gTLD DNSO as described by Don Telage is narrow in participation and offers a restricted set of views. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC important clarification (5/25/99 2:51:40 PM, #156) (Message has been read to the assembled group) DNRC has not yet looked at the compromise proposal and the board has not voted on it. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC important clarification (5/25/99 2:57:38 PM, #157) (Message has been read to the assembled group) DNRC has not yet looked at the compromise proposal and the board has not voted on it. DNRC was not involved in any of these elections. DNRC needs to review these proposals before we accept them. |
| Jeff Graber Association of Internet Professionals Vote should be on-line (5/25/99 3:04:34 PM, #158) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Any planned election should be handled on-line. Basing it on physical meeting is rather strange for an Internet org. |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET IP rights (5/25/99 3:08:06 PM, #159) (Message has been read to the assembled group) If decisions are to be made in time frames assigned arbitrarily by ICANN, there should be consideration for a thorough review and reconsideration process. |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET Non Commercial DNSO (5/25/99 3:19:29 PM, #160) (Message has been read to the assembled group) There appears to be a duality of approach, where exclusivity is a concern for NonCommercial DNSO proposals, but not for other constituencies. Is there a uniform ICANN approach toward DNSO constituency exclusivity? |
| kent crispin songbird (5/25/99 3:20:46 PM, #161) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I note that the DNRC has been admitted into the IP constituency -- this exclusionary policy in the NCC seems remarkably backward. |
| kent crispin songbird (5/25/99 3:24:08 PM, #162) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The NCC was *not* conceived as a place for minority interests; *all* the constituencies are for minority intersts; I repeat the example of the DNRC being included in the IP constituency. |
| Kevin Boyle Non-commercial TLD (5/25/99 3:35:33 PM, #164) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Any attempt by ICANN to force or enforce direction of a constituency is very disturbing. If this is the case there needs to be a revealing of the reasons and goals for this intrusion of the pre-defined constituency process. |
| Karl Auerbach Relative size of constituencies (5/25/99 3:42:42 PM, #165) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Given that there are far more individuals in the world than members of other constituencies, any body that represents individuals ought to have more votes for the council than other constituencies. There is certainly no fairness in having an entire constituency (and its votes) for one company and at the same time stuff the entire population of the world into an equal sized constituency. Those who disagree -- can you articulate, with precision and specificity, why such an unfair balance of power should exist within the DNSO? --karl-- |
| Mikki Barry DNRC individuals (5/25/99 3:43:01 PM, #166) (Message has been read to the assembled group) No other constituency has been asked where their funding is coming from. Individuals need perhaps more representation than any other group. Most of the other constituencies take power FROM individuals (some more directly than others). They certainly need a say, seats on the name council, and the ability to vote on board members. The funding issue is secondary. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Sunset provisions on constituencies (5/25/99 4:21:25 PM, #167) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Why not have a sunset provision on each constituency? In other words, each constituency should cease to be 12 months after formation and have to re-justify its existance anew. Why not? Why should the constituencies created now be cast forever into concrete? --karl-- |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET Chuck Gomes (5/25/99 4:30:19 PM, #168) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I would second Chuck's recommendation for a TLD expansion study, but would suggest that participation be open as the gTLD DNSO has not formerly been proposed or accepted. |
| Jeff Graber AIP Slow Down (5/25/99 4:32:06 PM, #169) (Message has been read to the assembled group) How can you be "electing" people so soon! There should be an On-line process with a call for nominations and full voting. And it is way too soon anyways as this guy is saying right now!!! clap clap!!! |
| Mikki Barry DNRC remote questions (5/25/99 4:33:19 PM, #170) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Would you PLEASE deal with our remote questions and comments in a timely manner? |
| Mikki Barry DNRC open, transparent, and accountable (5/25/99 4:37:40 PM, #171) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Why is the GAC meeting closed? I would like to register a significant protest. I find it highly shocking that a country's designee would be removed from a meeting. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles GAC straw poll... (5/25/99 4:39:15 PM, #172) (Message has been read to the assembled group) As to the vote about GAC being necessary... I vote that GAC is not needed, nor desireable. --karl-- |
| Mikki Barry DNRC seconded re: chairman's comments (5/25/99 4:40:29 PM, #173) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The chair's commentary is problematic. He should be as neutral as possible and should refrain from comment. |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET Names Council meeting (5/25/99 4:43:23 PM, #174) (Message has been read to the assembled group) It is not appropriate for a meeting of an Interim Names Council in Berlin. The issues at hand are important, but not *that* time critical. It is far more important for an open process to be defined. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC seconded re: Milton's suggestion (5/25/99 4:44:42 PM, #175) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Some non commercial TLDs should be exempt from any mandatory domain name dispute policy. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC WIPO Report (5/25/99 4:49:27 PM, #176) (Message has been read to the assembled group) What is more important than what is deciding, is who gets to decide it. The procedure for decision making is clear. There is no crisis impending that necessitates consideration of the WIPO proposal outside of the already set procedures as mapped out in the by laws. Domain name registrations are increasing exponentially. As a percentage, disputes are acctually DECREASING. Let it go through appropriate channels rather than an interim board creating substantive and far reaching policy. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC WIPO Report (5/25/99 4:50:27 PM, #177) (Message has been read to the assembled group) What is more important than what is deciding, is who gets to decide it. The procedure for decision making is clear. There is no crisis impending that necessitates consideration of the WIPO proposal outside of the already set procedures as mapped out in the by laws. Domain name registrations are increasing exponentially. As a percentage, disputes are acctually DECREASING. Let it go through appropriate channels rather than an interim board creating substantive and far reaching policy. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Reading the questions (5/25/99 4:53:47 PM, #178) (Message has been read to the assembled group) There are a lot of questions on the list that were not read by the chair. Could the chair please deal with all the questions/comments that have been sent via the net. --karl-- |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Research Committees (5/25/99 4:55:50 PM, #179) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I register a strong protest against "research committees". We do not need to add more layers of bureaucracy to the DNSO. It is already verging on the Byzantine. "Research committee" is yet another euphemism for moving control of DNSO policy into closed, dark rooms. --karl-- |
| Jeff Graber AIP Establish on-line open process (5/25/99 4:58:06 PM, #180) (Message has been read to the assembled group) It is great to have this simulcast but it is far more important for an open process to be defined. This mtg should work to establish this process to elect via an on-line method. |
| kent crispin songbird interim NC members (5/25/99 5:08:02 PM, #181) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Can we stop all this discussion about the GAC? It is not the business of the DNSO. |
| Gene Marsh anycastNET RECOMMENDATION (5/25/99 5:10:15 PM, #182) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Identify the issues that need to be researched, then allow them to be taken up by the DNSO constituency groups ONCE FORMED. The issue can be identified, as well as the responsible groups for later action. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Please handle the questions from the net. (5/25/99 5:10:21 PM, #183) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The last time that questions were read from the net, only a few were read. Please take net questions more frequently. --karl-- |
| jeff graber AIP nothing until formalities (5/25/99 5:10:22 PM, #184) (Message has been read to the assembled group) My vote -- Do nothing until formal elections of members!! |
| jeff graber AIP nothing until formalities (5/25/99 5:11:26 PM, #185) (Message has been read to the assembled group) My vote -- Do nothing until formal elections of members!! Mood of the mtg -- Should move swiftly to establish an on-line method for formal election. Do not undertake substansive decisions until such elections. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC research committees (5/25/99 5:14:07 PM, #186) (Message has been read to the assembled group) How many layers do we need? First constituencies, now research committees? I am very concerned about this type of thing. Please don't add any more layers. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC fast vs. slow (5/25/99 5:15:57 PM, #187) (Message has been read to the assembled group) It seems that people are advocating moving quickly on subjects they agree with, and slowly on subjects they disagree with. While this is human nature, perhaps we should consider the potential harms caused across the board by moving too rapidly. We have running code. Let's be careful about what we change about it. |
| David Schutt Speco Inc Research Comittees (5/25/99 5:17:01 PM, #188) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I don't see necessity of creating research commitees at this point. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles We don't need a working group (5/25/99 5:20:13 PM, #189) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Just as I object to "Research Committees", I also object to "working groups". There is utterly no reason to add so much structure to the DNSO and thus further hide responsibility, accountability, and openness. --karl-- |
| kent crispin songbird Suggestion (5/25/99 5:20:55 PM, #190) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I suggest that the interim NC members have a get-acquainted dinner or other meeting. Certainly at least some of them will remain as NC members, and there is no reason for them to refrain from meeting with each other. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Board and Research Committees (5/25/99 5:28:52 PM, #191) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I do not care if the board has adopted "bylaws" about Research Committees. It is not the business of the ICANN board to organize the DNSO. It is the DNSO's business to organize the DNSO. A small group of board members should not be allowed impose "Research Committees" on the DNSO. --karl-- |
| Mikki Barry DNRC WIPO's report (5/25/99 5:30:31 PM, #192) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Michael Sondow is correct in that there were no consumer groups represented on the Panel of Experts who gave in put to WIPO. Further, 4 members of that Panel of Experts have signed the petition asking for more time for commentary. Public interest groups, and others, do not have the time to read the 180 page report, not to mention write substantive comments. This is just way too soon. Although the discussions have lasted for a long time concerning the issues, there has never been clear consensus on even whether we even NEED an all encompassing mandatory policy, not to mention what is contained in that policy. It is creation of new international law where none currently exists. |
| David Schutt Speco Inc. Representation (5/25/99 5:31:33 PM, #193) (Message has been read to the assembled group) WIPO is a commercial interest group and It's reports -only- represent a subset of commercial opinions. |
| David Schutt Speco Inc. Representation (5/25/99 5:32:00 PM, #194) (Message has been read to the assembled group) WIPO is a commercial interest group and It's reports -only- represent a subset of commercial opinions. |
| kent crispin songbird (5/25/99 5:32:14 PM, #195) (Message has been read to the assembled group) There is no question: the WIPO process has been open and transparent. The fact is that there are some people that will fight the recommendations to the bitter end. There is nothing that can be done about that. We need to move forward. |
| Michael Froomkin U.Miami School of Law Research Committees, properly structured (5/25/99 5:32:38 PM, #196) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I do not share the opposition to research committees. Properly constituted, they could be very valuable. I suggest that a *small* number be formed (so as not to distract and dillute effort) and that they be taksed with operating in the IETF-style -- having their substantive debates online, and archived. While the (voting) committee members might be defined for decision making purposes (or be allowed to "define themeselves"), they could operate in ia fully transparent manner and accept input from anyone. In other words, research committees need not be secret. To the extent they allow thoughtful, collaberative, drafting and thinking between meetings they would seem to me to tend to promote openness, clarity, consensus and thoughtful decisions. They will also provide a fine mechanism for armchair participation by those of us who are not able to fly around the world. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles How many have read WIPO (5/25/99 5:33:47 PM, #197) (Message has been read to the assembled group) A question to the audience: How many of you have read the WIPO report -- be honest, show your hand. And how many of you understand it fully -- again show your hand. I anticipate less than a forrest of hands waving in the air. So why do people want to race to adopt something that they have neither yet read nor yet understand? --karl-- |
| David Schutt Speco WIPO Report (5/25/99 5:35:00 PM, #198) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The only business at hand is to create a representative organization. |
| Dan Steinberg Synthesis: Law & technology WIPO Report (5/25/99 5:35:59 PM, #199) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I would like to echo the other comments to date. All decisions on the WIPO report should be deferred to the DNSO, and the first sub-task should be a discussion on whether the recommendations of the WIPO report are in scope for the organization. Only if such a determination is made should substantive discussion on the merits of the WIPO report be even considered. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC gTLDs (5/25/99 5:38:20 PM, #200) (Message has been read to the assembled group) In response to Marilyn, if we should implement the WIPO report now and ask questions later, then why not add new gTLDs now, and revisit the decision later? You can't ask an interim, non elected board to make substantive policy decisions on this issue, but not on other issues, like creation of gTLDs. For every argument regarding why WIPO should be implemented, there is an almost identical argument as to why new gTLDs should be implemented. Again, it seems to come down to where your special interests lie. |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles Point about ICANN's board (5/25/99 5:39:24 PM, #201) (Message has been read to the assembled group) One speaker (from AT&T I believe) suggested that ICANN's board has the power to enact policy. That is incorrect; the board does not have the power to enact substantive policy regarding domain names and trademarks, the WIPO report. That power is vested in the DNSO and only the DNSO by the ICANN organic documents. --karl-- |
| kent crispin songbird working groups (5/25/99 5:44:22 PM, #202) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Closed research committees are not good, but working groups in the mode of the IETF are perfectly open, and such working groups should be formed -- set up mailing lists, define a charter, etd |
| Karl Auerbach The Ancient Order of Arrogant Juveniles No need to ask the board (5/25/99 5:45:25 PM, #203) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The board's actions specifying the structure of the DNSO is beyond the Board's powers given in the articles/bylaws. So why is it being proposed to ask the board to create constituency policy? The DNSO has full, plenary authority to act as it will in these matters. --karl-- |
| kent crispin songbird Working Groups (5/25/99 5:47:18 PM, #204) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The Interim NC should set up mailing lists and other stuff for the DNSO, and that should be done soon. |
| Dan Steinberg Arrogant Juvenile (Emeritus, former chief counsel) Audience poll on how many read the WIPO report (5/25/99 5:58:46 PM, #206) (Message has been read to the assembled group) For those that claim to have understood the report, remind them all that they are under oath and that the penalty for perjury in Germany is... |
| Dan Steinberg Arrogant Juvenile (emeritus) Thanks (5/25/99 6:02:57 PM, #207) (Message has been read to the assembled group) No need to read this out, but many thanks for the prompt response to submitted comments. It makes remote participation a valuable experience. |
| Craig Simon Delay Adoption of WIPO policy (5/25/99 6:23:08 PM, #208) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Regarding the WIPO recommendations. There was a dominant sentiment expressed by participants in various IFWP working groups that any NEWCO interim board should refrain from making critical decisions regarding DNS policy until a permanent board was selected. Therefore, if the ICANN interim board wishes to demonstrate continuity and harmony with the IFWP process, I believe it would inappropriate for the board to adopt any dispute resolution policy regarding gTLDs or ccTLDs until properly constituted MAC and DNSO bodies have made their pronouncements on this issue. Craig Simon |
| Dr Ivan Bishop personal query (5/25/99 6:31:29 PM, #209) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Given the recent establishment of the devolved Scottish parliament that only highlights the desires and needs of the Scots to be recognised once more as a nation once more, is there any reason why the Scottish parliament should not obtain an ISO3166 listing AND a ccTLD for Scotland? Thankyou. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC general questions (5/25/99 6:43:19 PM, #210) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Will all of the representatives of every country of the GAC reveal all of their interests in Internet issues and how they came to be representatives to the GAC? Would all of the representatives also please reveal who of their delegations read the entire WIPO report, and what comments they had besides "adopt it?" |
| Mikki Barry DNRC caring about consumers (5/25/99 7:17:15 PM, #211) (Message has been read to the assembled group) I'm sorry, but if you really cared about consumers, Mr. Twoomey, you would not be advocating the WIPO plan. I echo what Milton Mueller had to say. |
| Dr Ivan Bishop personal query (5/25/99 7:17:41 PM, #212) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The country code issue seems to be a hot topic, I'd be grateful if you could put my question about a Scottish ccTLD to the chair. thanks. Dr Ivan Bishop |
| Mikki Barry DNRC GAC and openness (5/25/99 7:22:28 PM, #213) (Message has been read to the assembled group) Is the GAC required to be open, promote due process, poll constituents prior to the adoption of delegate positions, etc? Otherwise, it would seem like all the horrors of governmental control with none of the safeguards. |
| dr ivan bishop persoanl comment not true (5/25/99 7:46:51 PM, #214) (Message has been read to the assembled group) ISO3166/MA says a country code may be assigned if three conditions are met. ISO will be approached in the near future about this matter for Scotlands code. If ISO adds scotland will the ccTLD be assigned or will this panel and what it stands for, bow to pressure from London NOT to, and thus become a tool of government? It seems ICANN will do whatever any major government tells it to do. |
| Mikki Barry DNRC WIPO process (5/25/99 8:01:04 PM, #215) (Message has been read to the assembled group) The WIPO process was open, yes. But it was not transparent or accountable. There were no "votes" taken. There was no "consensus" on even whether WIPO was the sole place for dispute resolution. I would go so far as to doubt that even a majority of all the participants agree that there should be a mandatory dispute policy and that one policy should be run by WIPO. In fact, every IFWP meeting reached no consensus on these issues except Reston, who said that SEVERAL dispute resolution processes should be developed. Despite the contention that this has been argued and rehashed, there IS no consensus. In the face of such lack of consensus, and in the face of already existing laws of soverign nations that WELL cover trademark holder's rights, it is not prudent for the GAC to endorse the WIPO policy, nor is it proper for the ICANN interim board to consider it. |
All times are Berlin (GMT +1)
This file is automatically generated.