Dear Members The latest edition of the BC newsletter is now available at the website: www.bizconst.org Best wishes Gary
Hello, I was surprised to see that the newsletter appears to contain "opinion pieces", for lack of a better term: http://www.bizconst.org/Newsletters/newsletter_Aug09.htm as opposed to strictly information. One-sided statements like: "Unfounded (and sometimes ridiculous) opposition has been raised as to the substance of the IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals..." are inflammatory and one-sided, and should have no place in a newsletter whose submission criteria was described (two weeks ago) as being "intended to provide members with summary information on current issues." There's a large gap between providing "information" and some of the statements of opinion which infect the newsletter. More care should be given to edit the newsletter submissions to remove these biased statements entirely, or to make it clear that they are only the opinion of the author. Much of the opposition to the IRT was on a solid foundation, and indeed ICANN will face great challenges if they attempt to implement those policies without modification to resolve the well reasoned concerns of those who made thoughtful comments. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:19 AM, BC Secretariat<secretariat@bizconst.org> wrote:
Dear Members
The latest edition of the BC newsletter is now available at the website: www.bizconst.org
Best wishes Gary
I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm. I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC. We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe. Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in. Marilyn Cade ICT StrategiesmCADE llc micro enterprise member of BC
Marilyn I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC. As one of three members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be rather a stretch. I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming. I would also suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader ICANN community. As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to suggestions for improvements. We have both provided regular updates to the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself. Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here http://nomcom.icann.org/ Kind regards. Liz On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm.
I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC.
We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe.
Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in.
Marilyn Cade ICT Strategies mCADE llc
micro enterprise member of BC
I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in nature and not only statements between individuals. So, I'll thank Liz for her response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general proposal and discussion for all BC members interests. My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT 'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the business user community to be considered as a NomCom member. Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about GNSO policy areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a constituency of the GNSO. That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote on two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council. However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization are actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the stability of the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy arena that has the IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever improved interaction between the other parts of the stakeholder community. Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes place, we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial user house". Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if we are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not about GNSO policy positions per se. At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats -- to achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process. Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and attention. That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course, so is something to be aware of. CC: bc-gnso@icann.org From: lizawilliams@mac.com To: marilynscade@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100 Marilyn I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC. As one of three members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be rather a stretch. I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming. I would also suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader ICANN community. As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to suggestions for improvements. We have both provided regular updates to the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself. Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here http://nomcom.icann.org/ Kind regards. Liz On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm. I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC. We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe. Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in. Marilyn Cade ICT StrategiesmCADE llc micro enterprise member of BC
Hello, I would welcome Mike Roberts' participation, if he was interested in the position. I believe there are multiple precedents for this. Wasn't Grant Forsythe a NomCom rep for the BC, even though he wasn't in the BC? And Waudo Singanga? Frankly, there would be greater participation in the BC if membership fees were lower or simply eliminated. This could easily be achieved by reducing the ginormous overspending on irrelevant/duplicative activities, running down the reserve to reasonable levels, taking advantage of the GNSO "toolkit", etc. I renew the request that the BC Budget should be public and posted on either the BC website or this public mailing list, in order to add transparency and accountability, in a similar way as ICANN files its IRS Form 990 disclosures. Similarly there should be a public list of all individuals and organizations that have received payments from the BC, and the relevant amounts. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Marilyn Cade<marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in nature and not only statements between individuals. So, I'll thank Liz for her response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general proposal and discussion for all BC members interests. My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT 'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the business user community to be considered as a NomCom member. Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about GNSO policy areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a constituency of the GNSO. That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote on two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council. However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization are actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the stability of the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy arena that has the IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever improved interaction between the other parts of the stakeholder community. Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes place, we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial user house". Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if we are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not about GNSO policy positions per se. At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats -- to achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process. Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and attention. That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course, so is something to be aware of.
________________________________ CC: bc-gnso@icann.org From: lizawilliams@mac.com To: marilynscade@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100
Marilyn I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC. As one of three members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be rather a stretch. I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming. I would also suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader ICANN community. As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to suggestions for improvements. We have both provided regular updates to the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself. Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here http://nomcom.icann.org/ Kind regards. Liz On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm. I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC. We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe. Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in. Marilyn Cade ICT Strategies mCADE llc micro enterprise member of BC
Dear George, All - I was actually a member of the BC (representing WITSA) when I served on the NonCom. However I concur with Marylin's views fully with regard to a strategic, big picture approach to the interests of the Business Community. Perhaps the secretariat can give some information on whther we have BC members from parts of the world where we need to strengthen our reach (developing countries) and who they are. Meantime I look forward to the BC making early preparation for outreach activity to attract more members from Africa when we converge in my home town, Nairobi, next March. Finally, I can say that the Nom-Com work requires a lot of personal sacrifice in terms of time and effort. Liz and Phil require our appreciation. Kind Regards, Dr. Waudo Siganga Vice-President WITSA-Africa Region On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:13 -0400, "George Kirikos" <icann@leap.com> wrote:
Hello,
I would welcome Mike Roberts' participation, if he was interested in the position.
I believe there are multiple precedents for this. Wasn't Grant Forsythe a NomCom rep for the BC, even though he wasn't in the BC? And Waudo Singanga?
Frankly, there would be greater participation in the BC if membership fees were lower or simply eliminated. This could easily be achieved by reducing the ginormous overspending on irrelevant/duplicative activities, running down the reserve to reasonable levels, taking advantage of the GNSO "toolkit", etc.
I renew the request that the BC Budget should be public and posted on either the BC website or this public mailing list, in order to add transparency and accountability, in a similar way as ICANN files its IRS Form 990 disclosures. Similarly there should be a public list of all individuals and organizations that have received payments from the BC, and the relevant amounts.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Marilyn Cade<marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in nature and not only statements between individuals. So, I'll thank Liz for her response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general proposal and discussion for all BC members interests. My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT 'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the business user community to be considered as a NomCom member. Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about GNSO policy areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a constituency of the GNSO. That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote on two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council. However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization are actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the stability of the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy arena that has the IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever improved interaction between the other parts of the stakeholder community. Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes place, we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial user house". Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if we are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not about GNSO policy positions per se. At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats -- to achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process. Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and attention. That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course, so is something to be aware of.
________________________________ CC: bc-gnso@icann.org From: lizawilliams@mac.com To: marilynscade@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100
Marilyn I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC. As one of three members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be rather a stretch. I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming. I would also suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader ICANN community. As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to suggestions for improvements. We have both provided regular updates to the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself. Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here http://nomcom.icann.org/ Kind regards. Liz On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm. I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC. We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe. Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in. Marilyn Cade ICT Strategies mCADE llc micro enterprise member of BC
Waudo, good to hear from you on the BC list. Recent BC policy on outreach has been to leverage ICC globally (led by Ayesha) and leverage local expertise per location (eg Liz Williams in Sydney). Given you are our only African resident associate member we look forward to your leadership in outreach activities wrt Nairobi. Philip
Sure Philip. I will liaise with Gary and Ayesha on this and keep all posted. Waudo On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:57 +0200, "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be> wrote:
Waudo, good to hear from you on the BC list.
Recent BC policy on outreach has been to leverage ICC globally (led by Ayesha) and leverage local expertise per location (eg Liz Williams in Sydney). Given you are our only African resident associate member we look forward to your leadership in outreach activities wrt Nairobi.
Philip
i like Marilyn's objective -- a strategic advocate of our role/ direction both as a constituency and as an organization (ICANN) relating to a worldwide community. i'm not completely opposed, but it seems a shame to have to go outside our membership to find such a person. it seems like we should be able to come up with a representative from within our ranks who can do a good job of helping us arrive at a widely shared/endorsed definition of that role and being an effective advocate for it on the NomCom. in corpspeak, this seems like a great leadership-development opportunity. :) for those of you who are wondering who Michael Roberts is, he was the first CEO of ICANN and has been a member of the CBUC in the past. here's a link to an ICANNwiki page about him; http://icannwiki.org/Michael_Roberts mikey On Jul 29, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in nature and not only statements between individuals. So, I'll thank Liz for her response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general proposal and discussion for all BC members interests.
My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT 'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the business user community to be considered as a NomCom member.
Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about GNSO policy areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a constituency of the GNSO.
That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote on two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council.
However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization are actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the stability of the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy arena that has the IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever improved interaction between the other parts of the stakeholder community.
Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes place, we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial user house".
Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if we are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not about GNSO policy positions per se.
At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats -- to achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process.
Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and attention.
That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course, so is something to be aware of.
CC: bc-gnso@icann.org From: lizawilliams@mac.com To: marilynscade@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100
Marilyn
I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC. As one of three members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be rather a stretch.
I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in a highly complex environment which is very time consuming. I would also suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader ICANN community.
As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to suggestions for improvements. We have both provided regular updates to the BC but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself. Of course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here http://nomcom.icann.org/
Kind regards.
Liz On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:
I've reviewed the requirements for Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm.
I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection from the BC.
We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his counterpart from another part of the globe.
Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for all BC members interested to listen in.
Marilyn Cade ICT Strategies mCADE llc
micro enterprise member of BC
- - - - - - - - - phone 651-647-6109 fax 866-280-2356 web www.haven2.com handle OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)
ICA takes strong exception to Mike's commentary (below). We believe that our opposition and that of many others to the URS has been well founded and that the use of the term "ridiculous" to characterize certain opposition to the URS and IP Clearinghouse (and we support the latter, in restricted form) is completely inappropriate. The comment fails to note that some opponents, like us, have called for expedited UDRP reform to put better and balanced protections in place for all parties at all gTLDs, including .com, and it also fails to mention that many parties -including the Chair of the GNSO- have taken the well justified position that the URS is a major policy change and not just an implementation detail that can only be put in place through a UDRP. Instead, the comment implies that ICANN staff and Board have the right to adopt it absent a PDP. Updates on current issues should strive to be balanced and not biased to fairly represent the diversity of views within the BC and the overall ICANN community and not just the personal view of the individual writing them. "Unfounded (and sometimes ridiculous) opposition has been raised as to the substance of the IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals -- the comment forum is here: http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/. But it is obvious that the UDRP has been entirely ineffective in deterring cybersquatting in the existing TLDs. So, after ten years of the UDRP, it is clear that new methods are needed to deal with this rampant problem. The IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals, in conjunction with one another, would strike a reasonable balance between trademark rights, protection of the public, and protection of domain name registrants. A series of global outreach events are currently discussing the IRT proposals and the ICANN Board is then expected to take action to incorporate some or all of the proposals into the application guidebook for new TLD applicants." 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 George Kirikos [icann@leap.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:42 AM To: BC gnso Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] BC Newsletter Hello, I was surprised to see that the newsletter appears to contain "opinion pieces", for lack of a better term: http://www.bizconst.org/Newsletters/newsletter_Aug09.htm as opposed to strictly information. One-sided statements like: "Unfounded (and sometimes ridiculous) opposition has been raised as to the substance of the IP Clearinghouse and URS proposals..." are inflammatory and one-sided, and should have no place in a newsletter whose submission criteria was described (two weeks ago) as being "intended to provide members with summary information on current issues." There's a large gap between providing "information" and some of the statements of opinion which infect the newsletter. More care should be given to edit the newsletter submissions to remove these biased statements entirely, or to make it clear that they are only the opinion of the author. Much of the opposition to the IRT was on a solid foundation, and indeed ICANN will face great challenges if they attempt to implement those policies without modification to resolve the well reasoned concerns of those who made thoughtful comments. Sincerely, George Kirikos 416-588-0269 http://www.leap.com/ On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:19 AM, BC Secretariat<secretariat@bizconst.org> wrote:
Dear Members
The latest edition of the BC newsletter is now available at the website: www.bizconst.org
Best wishes Gary
participants (8)
-
BC Secretariat -
George Kirikos -
Liz Williams -
Marilyn Cade -
Mike O'Connor -
Phil Corwin -
Philip Sheppard -
waudo siganga