Not confusing them Eric, but the issue has pre and post delegation implications. I asked about the disqualification if someone urges ICANN to pick for a reason outside ICANN¹s Mission because I have no idea how the ³challenge² that Milton is proposing could be accomplished. J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz <http://www.neustar.biz> On 1/18/16, 1:07 PM, "Eric (Maule) Brunner-Williams" <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
Becky,
Enforcement (after interpretation and examination of situational applicability) of some rule, e.g., applicant-assumed-obligation, occurs when the applicant has obtained a delegation. Selection amongst two or more applicants, for whatever reasons, and the AGB contained the rules applicable for the 2010 cohort, occurs before delegation.
The phrasing below confuses post-delegation and pre-delegation criteria and enforcements.
So if an applicant includes obligations in the application, it is ok for ICANN to enforce those commitments? What?s the principle - freedom of contract? But if GAC, ALAC, or someone else urges ICANN to pick one applicant over another, anyone can challenge that [what? The urging, the selection, something else?]? You?re disqualified if GAC endorses your application?
"freedom of contract" is inconsistent with the responsibilities of the NTIA and its contractors, and incompatible with a transition of a government contract, where pre-existing public interests are retained by the transitional contractor.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon