Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board
Dear all, Wolf-Ulrich's and my proposed draft is below. Apologies that, due to the limited functionality of the email program on my tablet, I've not been able to send just the text cut and pasted into a single email. Please let us know if you are fine with the letter. If I may, can I ask that comments be directed as far as possible to the substance rather than style (though I'm more than ready to take lessons on that in less time sensitive communications :-) Thanks and cheers Mary -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC From: "<KnobenW@telekom.de>" <KnobenW@telekom.de> To: Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> CC: Mary, as I said I'm ok with the text. I would like to ask councillors whether we could give the following hint to the board regarding the fee reduction: << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
Which may be inserted into the 3rd para (see attached) See you later Wolf-Ulrich -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu [mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2011 15:53 An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Betreff: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC Oops, I meant draft letter to the Board! "Mary Wong<mary.wong@law.unh.edu>" <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> wrote: Hi Wolf, thanks for volunteering to help out! What do you think of this - (From Stéphane as Council chair to Steve Crocker) Dear Dr. Crocker, I am pleased to send the following note on behalf of the GNSO Council, in relation to the recommendations contained in the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group (WG) Final Report. We understand that the Board has been working on the issue of how ICANN can demonstrate its commitment to ensuring fair and non-discriminatory access by and adequate support for needy applicants in the new gTLD program, and hope that the GNSO community can be of assistance in this regard. The GNSO Council and community which it represents shares the Board's commitment and fully supports the goals around which the JAS WG was formed. The Council is extremely grateful to the WG and its volunteers, for the incredible amount of work and the many substantive recommendations that it made, including in the Milestone Reports that were published prior to the Final Report. We accepted all the WG reports and have actively encouraged each of the GNSO's constituences and stakeholder groups to submit substantive comments and, where appropriate, level of support for each of the WG's recommendations. We understand that the Registry and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups have each submitted formal comments. We believe that other groups will follow suit. As the overall issue and specific recommendations are fairly complex, spanning financial, technical and policy implementation matters, we hope the Board understands that this is not a topic on which there is a unified community consensus. We believe that, as each constituency and stakeholder group's comments are received, it will be possible to see where there is consensus and/or support, and where there is disagreement. << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
In addition, we hope that more specific implementation issues and suggestions may emerge from these comments.
We are pleased that the Board has demonstrated a continuing and serious interest in the work of the JAS WG, and wish to inform you that the Council and GNSO community stands ready to assist the Board in coming to implementable decisions regarding this very important issue. Yours sincerely, Stéphane Van Gelder GNSO Council Chair
Looks good Mary. Nicely done. ________________________________ From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu Sent: Thu 10/27/2011 8:04 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board Dear all, Wolf-Ulrich's and my proposed draft is below. Apologies that, due to the limited functionality of the email program on my tablet, I've not been able to send just the text cut and pasted into a single email. Please let us know if you are fine with the letter. If I may, can I ask that comments be directed as far as possible to the substance rather than style (though I'm more than ready to take lessons on that in less time sensitive communications :-) Thanks and cheers Mary -------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC From: "<KnobenW@telekom.de>" <KnobenW@telekom.de> To: Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> CC: Mary, as I said I'm ok with the text. I would like to ask councillors whether we could give the following hint to the board regarding the fee reduction: << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
Which may be inserted into the 3rd para (see attached) See you later Wolf-Ulrich -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu [mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2011 15:53 An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Betreff: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC Oops, I meant draft letter to the Board! "Mary Wong<mary.wong@law.unh.edu>" <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> wrote: Hi Wolf, thanks for volunteering to help out! What do you think of this - (From Stéphane as Council chair to Steve Crocker) Dear Dr. Crocker, I am pleased to send the following note on behalf of the GNSO Council, in relation to the recommendations contained in the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group (WG) Final Report. We understand that the Board has been working on the issue of how ICANN can demonstrate its commitment to ensuring fair and non-discriminatory access by and adequate support for needy applicants in the new gTLD program, and hope that the GNSO community can be of assistance in this regard. The GNSO Council and community which it represents shares the Board's commitment and fully supports the goals around which the JAS WG was formed. The Council is extremely grateful to the WG and its volunteers, for the incredible amount of work and the many substantive recommendations that it made, including in the Milestone Reports that were published prior to the Final Report. We accepted all the WG reports and have actively encouraged each of the GNSO's constituences and stakeholder groups to submit substantive comments and, where appropriate, level of support for each of the WG's recommendations. We understand that the Registry and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups have each submitted formal comments. We believe that other groups will follow suit. As the overall issue and specific recommendations are fairly complex, spanning financial, technical and policy implementation matters, we hope the Board understands that this is not a topic on which there is a unified community consensus. We believe that, as each constituency and stakeholder group's comments are received, it will be possible to see where there is consensus and/or support, and where there is disagreement. << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
In addition, we hope that more specific implementation issues and suggestions may emerge from these comments.
We are pleased that the Board has demonstrated a continuing and serious interest in the work of the JAS WG, and wish to inform you that the Council and GNSO community stands ready to assist the Board in coming to implementable decisions regarding this very important issue. Yours sincerely, Stéphane Van Gelder GNSO Council Chair
Well done, Mary and Wolf-Ulrich! Thomas Am 27.10.2011 um 15:17 schrieb Mason Cole:
Looks good Mary. Nicely done.
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu Sent: Thu 10/27/2011 8:04 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board
Dear all,
Wolf-Ulrich's and my proposed draft is below. Apologies that, due to the limited functionality of the email program on my tablet, I've not been able to send just the text cut and pasted into a single email.
Please let us know if you are fine with the letter. If I may, can I ask that comments be directed as far as possible to the substance rather than style (though I'm more than ready to take lessons on that in less time sensitive communications :-)
Thanks and cheers Mary
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC From: "<KnobenW@telekom.de>" <KnobenW@telekom.de> To: Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> CC:
Mary, as I said I'm ok with the text.
I would like to ask councillors whether we could give the following hint to the board regarding the fee reduction: << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
Which may be inserted into the 3rd para (see attached)
See you later Wolf-Ulrich
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu [mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2011 15:53 An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Betreff: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC
Oops, I meant draft letter to the Board!
"Mary Wong<mary.wong@law.unh.edu>" <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> wrote:
Hi Wolf, thanks for volunteering to help out! What do you think of this -
(From Stéphane as Council chair to Steve Crocker)
Dear Dr. Crocker,
I am pleased to send the following note on behalf of the GNSO Council, in relation to the recommendations contained in the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group (WG) Final Report. We understand that the Board has been working on the issue of how ICANN can demonstrate its commitment to ensuring fair and non-discriminatory access by and adequate support for needy applicants in the new gTLD program, and hope that the GNSO community can be of assistance in this regard.
The GNSO Council and community which it represents shares the Board's commitment and fully supports the goals around which the JAS WG was formed. The Council is extremely grateful to the WG and its volunteers, for the incredible amount of work and the many substantive recommendations that it made, including in the Milestone Reports that were published prior to the Final Report. We accepted all the WG reports and have actively encouraged each of the GNSO's constituences and stakeholder groups to submit substantive comments and, where appropriate, level of support for each of the WG's recommendations.
We understand that the Registry and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups have each submitted formal comments. We believe that other groups will follow suit. As the overall issue and specific recommendations are fairly complex, spanning financial, technical and policy implementation matters, we hope the Board understands that this is not a topic on which there is a unified community consensus. We believe that, as each constituency and stakeholder group's comments are received, it will be possible to see where there is consensus and/or support, and where there is disagreement. << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
In addition, we hope that more specific implementation issues and suggestions may emerge from these comments.
We are pleased that the Board has demonstrated a continuing and serious interest in the work of the JAS WG, and wish to inform you that the Council and GNSO community stands ready to assist the Board in coming to implementable decisions regarding this very important issue.
Yours sincerely, Stéphane Van Gelder GNSO Council Chair
___________________________________________________________ Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm) Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert HRB 9262, AG Bonn Büro / Office Bonn: Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0 Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.: Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56 Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66 mailto: rickert@anwaelte.de skype-id: trickert web: www.anwaelte.de
Thanks Mary and Wolf for doing this. I have put this in a word document, and edited mostly with a mind to make the letter truly palatable by all groups. My take is that we are doing this to send the Board the message that we have not brushed this aside, but not to give them political messages about JAS (each group can do that by itself). Thoughts? Stéphane P.S.: Glen, is there GNSO letterhead for this kind of letter? Le 27 oct. 2011 à 16:23, Thomas Rickert a écrit :
Well done, Mary and Wolf-Ulrich!
Thomas
Am 27.10.2011 um 15:17 schrieb Mason Cole:
Looks good Mary. Nicely done.
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org on behalf of Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu Sent: Thu 10/27/2011 8:04 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Fwd: draft letter on JAS WG to the Board
Dear all,
Wolf-Ulrich's and my proposed draft is below. Apologies that, due to the limited functionality of the email program on my tablet, I've not been able to send just the text cut and pasted into a single email.
Please let us know if you are fine with the letter. If I may, can I ask that comments be directed as far as possible to the substance rather than style (though I'm more than ready to take lessons on that in less time sensitive communications :-)
Thanks and cheers Mary
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: AW: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC From: "<KnobenW@telekom.de>" <KnobenW@telekom.de> To: Mary Wong <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> CC:
Mary, as I said I'm ok with the text.
I would like to ask councillors whether we could give the following hint to the board regarding the fee reduction: << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
Which may be inserted into the 3rd para (see attached)
See you later Wolf-Ulrich
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu [mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Oktober 2011 15:53 An: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich Betreff: P.S. Re: Draft letter to GAC
Oops, I meant draft letter to the Board!
"Mary Wong<mary.wong@law.unh.edu>" <Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu> wrote:
Hi Wolf, thanks for volunteering to help out! What do you think of this -
(From Stéphane as Council chair to Steve Crocker)
Dear Dr. Crocker,
I am pleased to send the following note on behalf of the GNSO Council, in relation to the recommendations contained in the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) Working Group (WG) Final Report. We understand that the Board has been working on the issue of how ICANN can demonstrate its commitment to ensuring fair and non-discriminatory access by and adequate support for needy applicants in the new gTLD program, and hope that the GNSO community can be of assistance in this regard.
The GNSO Council and community which it represents shares the Board's commitment and fully supports the goals around which the JAS WG was formed. The Council is extremely grateful to the WG and its volunteers, for the incredible amount of work and the many substantive recommendations that it made, including in the Milestone Reports that were published prior to the Final Report. We accepted all the WG reports and have actively encouraged each of the GNSO's constituences and stakeholder groups to submit substantive comments and, where appropriate, level of support for each of the WG's recommendations.
We understand that the Registry and Non-Commercial Stakeholder Groups have each submitted formal comments. We believe that other groups will follow suit. As the overall issue and specific recommendations are fairly complex, spanning financial, technical and policy implementation matters, we hope the Board understands that this is not a topic on which there is a unified community consensus. We believe that, as each constituency and stakeholder group's comments are received, it will be possible to see where there is consensus and/or support, and where there is disagreement. << In particular we are confident that a common view can be achieved on the fee reduction which we see essential for needy applicants who qualify, thereby ensuring benefits from the new gTLD program are open to all parts of the community.
In addition, we hope that more specific implementation issues and suggestions may emerge from these comments.
We are pleased that the Board has demonstrated a continuing and serious interest in the work of the JAS WG, and wish to inform you that the Council and GNSO community stands ready to assist the Board in coming to implementable decisions regarding this very important issue.
Yours sincerely, Stéphane Van Gelder GNSO Council Chair
___________________________________________________________ Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm) Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert HRB 9262, AG Bonn
Büro / Office Bonn: Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0
Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.: Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56
Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66
mailto: rickert@anwaelte.de skype-id: trickert web: www.anwaelte.de
participants (4)
-
Mary.Wong＠law.unh.edu -
Mason Cole -
Stéphane Van Gelder -
Thomas Rickert