RE: [cctld-discuss] ccNSO membership applications.
Joel, I'll do my best;-) 1. If a ccTLD has a contract with ICANN then they are contractually bound by various things but as most ccTLDs don't have a contract let's ignore that for now. 2. When you join the ccNSO you agree to be bound by the ICANN bylaws while you are a member of the ccNSO. Therefore, if ICANN were to introduce a new bylaw that has an effect on the ccTLDs then you would be bound by it unless you quit the ccNSO OR unless you apply to be exempt from it (see point d) below) 3. BUT under the bylaws (Article IX Section 1 Clause 1) it states that developing and recommending global policies relating to ccTLDs is the job of the ccNSO. So, any global policy relating to ccTLDs must be developed and recommended using the ccNSO Policy Development Process (Annex B to the bylaws). And, in the PDP it states that if the ICANN board does not accept a recommendation from the ccNSO then the ICANN board MUST maintain the status quo. The quote from the PDP is: " ......if the Board shall decide not to accept a ccNSO...recommendation.... then the Board shall not be entitled to set policy on the issue addressed by the recommendation and the status quo shall be preserved until such time as the ccNSO shall, under the ccPDP, make a recommendation on the issue that is deemed acceptable by the Board." So let's look at how this might work in simple terms and the possible outcomes: a) A global policy relating to ccTLDs needs to be made. b) The ccNSO launches the PDP and comes up with a recommendation. c) If that recommendation is not accepted by the Board of ICANN then the Board cannot make policy on that issue and must maintain the status quo. d) If the recommendation is accepted by the Board of ICANN and the policy is made then, as a member of the ccNSO you have 3 choices; You can accept the policy and follow it. You can seek an exemption from it under Article IX Section 4 Clause 11 on the basis that implementation of the policy would require you to breach custom, religion, or public policy your country. You can quit the ccNSO and thus not be bound to follow the policy. In a nutshell, that's it. I hope it's clear but I do understand that as I and others have been 'immersed' in this for some time what seems clear to us is not always clear to others. Hope that helps and if you or anyone else has any questions please let us know. Cheers, Chris Disspain CEO - auDA email@example.com www.auda.org.au -----Original Message----- From: joel disini [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Monday, 1 September 2003 15:21 To: email@example.com Cc: Chris Disspain; firstname.lastname@example.org; Paul M Kane; Alf Hansen Subject: Re: [cctld-discuss] ccNSO membership applications. Paul M Kane <Paul.Kane@nic.ac> writes: >remember ccNSO membership also causes ccTLDs signing up commit to >following ICANN's own Bylaws. "Alf Hansen" <email@example.com> writes: >.."(b) adhere to ICANN bylaws as they apply to ccTLDs (Article IX and >Annexes B >and C of the ICANN bylaws found at >http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm);" "Chris Disspain" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: >Any changes in the ICANN >by laws that seek to bind ccTLDs can only bind those who have contracts >or members of the ccNSO AFTER such a change had been subjected to the >ccNSO Policy Development Process. And even then, ccTLD managers can >leave if they wish. Can someone kindly explain who is correct? My understanding is that if a ccTLD joins the ccNSO, that ccTLD is not necessarily subject to follow ICANN directives (also knows as "consensus-based policies"). And, as Chris says, any ICANN policy will have to be approved by the ccNSO before it can be "binding" on the ccTLD. Lastly, to quote an APTLD colleague, is expected that peer pressure among ccTLDs is what will make the "rogue" ccTLD conform to ccNSO approved policies, as the "rogue" ccTLD will always have the option of leaving the ccNSO. If this is the case - how does one explain Alf's quote wherein ICANN bylaws will apply to ccNSO-member ccTLDs? How can a ccNSO-member ccTLD not be subject to ICANN directives (sorry - "consensus-based policies") YET be subject to ICANN bylaws? What exactly does this mean anyway? And is the ccNSO like Congress and ICANN like the President? Eg - ccNSO submits bills to ICANN to ratify, but ICANN can always exercise its Presidential veto? We haven't signed up yet to join the ccNSO, and I presume there are many others out there who need this matter clarified before deciding to join or not join the ccNSO. Thanks in advance, Joel