As did I. Alan At 28/09/2011 08:35 PM, tim@godaddy.com wrote:
I received it from John via the list.
Tim
-----Original Message----- From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us> Sender: owner-council@gnso.icann.org Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 20:23:01 To: 'Adrian Kinderis'<adrian@ausregistry.com.au>; 'john@crediblecontext.com'<john@crediblecontext.com>; 'Marika Konings'<marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: 'council@gnso.icann.org'<council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: RE: [council] A thought on the potential of a "seal program" for non-binding best practices
We will be sending out the proposed Dakar agenda shortly for comment, but we were planning on including this topic.
On a separate note, for some reason I did not get john's e-mail until Adrian replied. Is this just an issue with my e-mail or did others have the same problem?
Thanks,
Jeffrey J. Neuman Vice President, Law and Policy Neustar, Inc Jeff.Neuman@Neustar.biz P: 571-434-5772 M: 202-549-5079
-----Original Message----- From: Adrian Kinderis [mailto:adrian@ausregistry.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 07:53 PM Eastern Standard Time To: john@crediblecontext.com; Marika Konings Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RE: [council] A thought on the potential of a "seal program" for non-binding best practices
Can we add this to the agenda in Dakar please?
The Registrars will have lots to say here J
I appreciate the perspective and applaud JB for his approach.
Adrian Kinderis
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of john@crediblecontext.com Sent: Thursday, 29 September 2011 1:18 AM To: Marika Konings Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] A thought on the potential of a "seal program" for non-binding best practices
Marika & fellow Coucillors:
While I am totally supportive of working to reach agreement on a shared definition of "best practices" -- their identification, implementation and measurement -- there is something in the notion of a "seal of approval" that most piques my interest.
As a founding member of the Board of TRUSTe (www.truste.com), the online privacy rights organization that manages a seal program for data collection and use, I am familiar with the consumer value of such industry self-regulatory programs can deliver.
In the case of non-binding policies it may be that such an approach -- a seal granted and monitored by ICANN or a third-party -- can make the implementation of these policies a matter of competitive advantage for registrars and registries.
As the non-binding best practices are identified, they can be used as a way to review business practices and earn (or not) a seal of approval for the applying party. The seal can them become a part of that company's competitive marketing. Consumers can then choose to work with a company based on their commitment to those policies, knowing that a third-party is monitoring performance.
This could be a way to supplement the consensus policy process, using market forces help lead to consumer advantage.
Cheers,
Berard
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [council] Discussion Paper on the Creation of Best Practices to Address the Abusive Registrations of Domain Names From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Date: Wed, September 28, 2011 3:20 am To: "council@gnso.icann.org" <council@gnso.icann.org>
Dear All,
As requested by the GNSO Council, please find attached the discussion paper on 'the creation of non-binding best practices to help registrars andregistries address the abusive registrations of domain names' prepared by ICANN Staff. We would like to suggest that the GNSO Council consider opening a public comment forum on this document to allow for community input on the issues outlined in the paper as well as the proposed next steps. Should the Council agree with this suggestion, a time has been tentatively reserved at the ICANN meeting in Senegal to organize a workshop on the paper and solicit community input (scheduled for Wednesday 26 October from 9.00 10.30 local time). We look forward to receiving your feedback.
With best regards,
Marika