Walu,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Walubengo J <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jwalu@yahoo.com" target="_blank">jwalu@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">Alice, McTim et al.<br><br>Plse bring us upto speed on the what is the beef here. </td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote>
<div>
<br>The beef here is about who gets the final say about what goes in the rootzone. That responsibility lies with ICANN and its constituent Supporting Organisations, but ultimately with the Board of Trustees of ICANN. Many in the GAC think they should have veto power of the BoT, and some think they already do have this power. <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">
My recollection is that the .xxx top level domain (for Pornographic content) was previously vetoed by the Bush (Jnr) government(?) </td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>not the case. An earlier ICANN Board approved .xxx. Later, the GAC asked for a delay and ultimately sought to overturn this earlier Board decision (lots of pressure by the Bushies here, yes) and the issue went to binding arbitration. ICANN was told by the arbitration that they had to allow .xxx, and so they did, eventually despite the GAC not being able to articulate what they wanted in a timely manner.<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">
but somewhat the Obama administration seems to have favored it</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br><br>also not correct, the DoC of the Obama admin has made lots of noises against .xxx.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top"> and by extension ICANN - has finally and procedurally filled the intention to implement it (?).<br></td></tr></tbody></table>
</blockquote><div><br>.xxx is in the rootzone and hence live on the internet. <br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top"><br>So what's with the EU request to delay the implementation?</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>Well it is too late for that. Politics I guess??<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">
Is it that the EU is now backtracking on the .xxx domain?</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>I think they have had reservations about it all along, so no, not backtracking. Just trying to assert authority they don't have, and that they KNOW the US won't exercise (and they have said in the past that they don't want the US to exercise it).<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">
And I wonder what is the general "African" position (if there ever was one) on this whole issue?<br></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br><br>I imagine most GAC folks from Africa would be against it.<br>
<br>IIRC, there are several on this list, perhaps they can speak up?<br><br></div></div>-- <br>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<br>