Thanks Philip for all your work on this. I support this draft. I agree completely with Phil Corwin's comments about distraction, which I think are covered well in the document. Mike Rodenbaugh RODENBAUGH LAW tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087 http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Phil Corwin Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 8:17 AM To: Philip Sheppard; bc-gnso@icann.org Subject: RE: [bc-gnso] BC position EOI ICA is fine with the final draft. While we do not have a formal position pro or con on the EOI, my personal view is that it is a distraction from the main game -- that every hour spent debating whether there should be an EOI, what its purpose is, and what its terms should be is an hour that is not being devoted to resolving the key issues that would permit the new gTLD application window to open. Philip S. Corwin Partner Butera & Andrews 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20004 202-347-6875 (office) 202-347-6876 (fax) 202-255-6172 (cell) "Luck is the residue of design." -- Branch Rickey _____ From: owner-bc-gnso@icann.org [owner-bc-gnso@icann.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard [philip.sheppard@aim.be] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 3:30 AM To: bc-gnso@icann.org Subject: [bc-gnso] BC position EOI Thank you for the last round of comments. Our 14 day process is almost complete and I wanted to send a copy of our paper so that BC colleagues in Nairobi will have a position to speak to. I attach a version three factoring in the last round of comments / support. This includes all substantive contributions of content though not all of the style suggestions. Us rapporteurs should be free to retain that element! For good order I also attach a clean version 3 and have entitled it "final" to facilitate any external communication in Nairobi. Philip