I didn’t receive the original e-mail from Maggie.

I’m OK with the content, but I expressed then and repeat here I’m not so sure about our first paragraph on the Clearing House.

There is no need for the clearinghouse to be separate and independent from ICANN. ICANN should oversee and have complete responsibility for the clearinghouse.

Although I agree that ICANN should have complete rights for overseeing and should have the power to influence its operations, I have doubts if there’s not an arrangement that could reduce the extent of the liabilities on ICANN. My reasoning is that although the Clearing House is fundamental to expedite the process of registration (which pertains to ICANN) it will be dealing in essence with the subject of intellectual property, which is not the fundamental concern of ICANN and for which there are other more apt institutions.

Jaime Wagner

ISPs Representative

CGI (Brazilian Internet Steering Commitee)
jaime @cgi.br +55(51)8126-0916
jaime@corp.plugin.com.br +55(51)3123-1701

From: owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-ispcp@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tony Holmes
Sent: quarta-feira, 28 de outubro de 2009 21:59
To: 'Mansourkia, Magnolia'; ispcp@icann.org
Subject: [ispcp] RE: IRT statement

Maggie (and drafting team)

Many thanks for producing this and meeting the time constraints.

I’m fine with the content, its brief and covers what’s required as the initial ISPCP input.

Tony

From: Mansourkia, Magnolia [mailto:maggie.mansourkia@verizon.com]
Sent: 28 October 2009 07:27
To: ispcp@icann.org; Tony Holmes
Subject: IRT statement
Importance: High

Hi all. These are the proposed bullet points that Tony will use as the basis of our constituency statement for the IRT working group. Please review and provide your comments to the list. Obviously, we did not address every question in the letter, only those that we had a vested interest in.

There is no need for the clearinghouse to be separate and independent from ICANN. ICANN should oversee and have complete responsibility for the clearinghouse.
URS must be mandatory. Staff’s belief that there is a strong incentive to do this anyway does not address the impact of a business model formed as a haven for bad actors.
The clearinghouse is an existing and proven model that preserves rights while expediting the registrants ability to register domains that do not infringe on the rights of others. It is a model that should extend to existing registries, but consideration should be given to the timing.

Please copy the list on your response, if any. Tony will need our responses by end of day, Thursday, October 29th.

Thanks,