Fwd: In response to Eric Brunner Williams' Comments (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/002351.html)
FYI, as received - Dev Anand ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andrew Weissberg <andyw@dothealthgtld.com> Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:36 PM Subject: In response to Eric Brunner Williams' Comments (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/002351.html) To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> Cc: Richard Butcher <richardobutcher2@gmail.com>, "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us>, Neil Posner <neil.posner@digitalpublishingpartners.com> Hello Dev, I am responding to the comments assertions which were made by Eric Brunner-Williams at Wed Mar 6 18:20:02 UTC 2013, which are duly noted and accessible at http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/002351.html. For the record, and for the ALAC's full clarification and understanding: We indeed promptly shared the DotHealth, LLC PIC Specification with the ADG of the World Health Organization (WHO) via e-mail (9:34PM Eastern Time on 3/5/13), as well as with the leadership and primary contact points at the NABP and our other supporting organizations on 3/5/13 - roughly hours after it had been submitted to ICANN. We also provided background information surrounding the ICANN request/recommendation for PIC specifications. If necessary, such individuals can be directly contacted regarding these matters, and for which I'd be happy to attempt to facilitate if needed. Today, we posted the DotHealth, LLC PIC specification on our web site (http://dothealthgtld.com/news.html) and which was uploaded to the ICANN New gTLD web site less than 3 hours ago. The "modality" of such commitments (as Eric suggests in his comments) are in direct response to WHO Executive Board Resolution 10.5, the follow on directives from the WHO's Director General for this tabled resolution, as well as in consideration of DotHealth's previous, current and continued dialogue with the Assistant Director General of the WHO regarding the .health TLD and the DotHealth, LLC application (https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicatio...) As it has been advised that only members of the ALAC should be posting comments on its community forums, and having respect for these established processes and rules, I will leave it to you to decide on how this information is further communicated to your colleagues and peers in the ALAC. Sincerely yours, Andy Weissberg Andy Weissberg, Co-founder & CEO DotHealth, LLC
FYI, as received - Dev Anand
Dev, Thank you for posting the responsive comments of Mr. Weissberg. I appreciate that you're not vouching for the correctness and completeness of the communication relayed. I appreciate also that having posted the PIC to a public archive maintained by ICANN, that the applicant subsequently notified several third parties, one being one of the seven (7) Assistant Directors General of the World Health Organization. As there are several Assistant Directors General of the World Health Organization, I accept the offer happily made by Mr. Weissberg to facilitate communication with this person, and with the others he has offered to facilitate communications with, for the purpose offered. I'm looking forward to further comments from Dr. Dzenowagis, and others, though it is rather late in Geneva, and time presses. Eric Brunner-Williams
On 3/6/13 11:50 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote: A follow-up to the prior note from Mr. Weissman and relayed by Dev, not necessary to today's NARALO question, but relevant to the claims advanced prior to March 8th: Mr. Weissman writes, inter alia, that:
as well as in consideration of DotHealth's previous, current and continued dialogue with the Assistant Director General of the WHO regarding the .health TLD and the DotHealth, LLC application
I've the following questions: 1. Is the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the ADG within his or her official capacity within the World Health Organization? 2. Is the representation that this dialogue was is not merely informative and/or interrogatory? 3. Is the representation that "Executive Board Resolution 10.5" relates specifically and directly to the DotHealth LLC application? I've tried to phrase these as questions to which the likely answer is a simple "yes". I trust that competent answers will be forthcoming prior to the point in time when the ALAC considers the present objection and Mr. Weissman's counterclaims. Eric Brunner-Williams
FYI, as received - Dev Anand ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andy Weissberg <andyw@dothealthgtld.com> Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:31 PM Subject: Follow up Answers to EBW Questions To: "devtee@gmail.com" <devtee@gmail.com> Hello Dev: In response to the questions raised by Eric Brunner Williams in this post: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/2013-March/007152.html 1. Is the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the ADG within his or her official capacity within the World Health Organization? Yes. This dialogue has been direct with the ADG who is officially responsible for the WHOs resolutions for e-health and health-related domain names. 2. Is the representation that this dialogue was is not merely informative and/or interrogatory? This dialogue is and has been informative for both parties, although in no respect should it be considered as being "interrogatory." We assume that the ADG will respectfully share the WHOs official views surrounding engagement between the parties. 3. Is the representation that "Executive Board Resolution 10.5" relates specifically and directly to the DotHealth LLC application? The EB Resolution is related to numerous issues pertaining to e-health and health-related domain names, including and not limited to applications for the .health TLD (see item #23, pg. 5). The resolution and related follow up material are public record: -http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB132/B132_24-en.pdf http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un_geneva/documents/eu_statments/who/20130... http://www.ghwatch.org/who-watch/eb132/ehealth On a related note, and to eliminate any further confusion as a matter of future comments, questions or assertions, please also inform Mr. Brunner-Williams that the correct representation of my last name is Weissberg, not "Weissman." Best regards, Andy W. On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
On 3/6/13 11:50 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote:
A follow-up to the prior note from Mr. Weissman and relayed by Dev, not necessary to today's NARALO question, but relevant to the claims advanced prior to March 8th:
Mr. Weissman writes, inter alia, that:
as well as in consideration of DotHealth's previous, current and continued dialogue with the Assistant Director General of the WHO regarding the .health TLD and the DotHealth, LLC application
I've the following questions:
1. Is the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the ADG within his or her official capacity within the World Health Organization?
2. Is the representation that this dialogue was is not merely informative and/or interrogatory?
3. Is the representation that "Executive Board Resolution 10.5" relates specifically and directly to the DotHealth LLC application?
I've tried to phrase these as questions to which the likely answer is a simple "yes".
I trust that competent answers will be forthcoming prior to the point in time when the ALAC considers the present objection and Mr. Weissman's counterclaims.
Eric Brunner-Williams ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
Dev, Thank you for again posting the responsive comments of Mr. Weissberg. I appreciate that you're not vouching for the correctness and completeness of the communication relayed -- least off all my mangling made of his name in a prior communication. [4] If the representation of the "previous, current and continued dialogue" with the WHO ADG is that it is more than merely informative, then does Mr. Weissberg offer the understanding that the relationship between DotHealth LLC and the World Health Organization is distinct in substance -- here, support for one applicant over another -- from the relationships between all other similar applicants for "health", in the Latin and Han scripts and the World Health Organization? Again, I've tried to phrase these as questions to which the likely answer is a simple "yes". Again, I trust that competent answers will be forthcoming prior to the point in time when the ALAC considers the present objection and Mr. Weissberg's counterclaims, as time is pressing. Eric Brunner-Williams
participants (2)
-
Dev Anand Teelucksingh -
Eric Brunner-Williams