Next Meeting Cancelled

The VI WG meetings are cancelled until further notice pending the GNSO Council's Review of the Phase I Interim Report. The Phase I Interim Report is to be delivered to the GNSO Council on 9 November 2010. The final form is attached below:

 Phase I Interim Report Vertical Integration Final 9 Nov 2010.pdf

Information / Resources

Please review the draft Phase I Interim Report prior to the 8 November 2010 WG call:

Phase I Interim Report Vertical Integration PDP WG 2 NOV 2010 v1.doc

Revised Initial Report on Vertical Integration Between Registries and Registrars:

Revised Initial Report Vertical Integration PDP WG 18 Aug 2010 Final.pdf

Summary of Public Comment Forum-

Summary of public comments for Initial Report on VI_rev 4.pdf

Initial-report snapshot drafts Initial Report Snapshots
Proposals addressing Vertical Integration Vertical Integration Resources
Public email archives:
Issues Report on Vertical Integration Between Registries and Registrars file: GNSO Issues Report Vertical Separation FINAL.pdf

Harms -- working documents

Antony Van Couvering 16 August draft of some harms that will be caused by VI/CO restrictions: VI WG AVC 16 Aug FIRST DRAFT HARMS CAUSED BY VI-CO.pdf

Scott Austin 6 August memo to the VI WG on Potential Harms: VI WG S Austin 6 Aug Memo_to_VIWG_re_Potential_Harms.pdf

Jeff Eckhaus 9 August Summary of Potential Harms from WG participants: VI WG J Eckhaus 9 Aug Harms Projectv1.pdf

Click on the Harms link to visit the collaborative workspace for this topic



Initial Report Published for Public Comment on 23 July 2010.

Please provide comments on the Initial Report until 12 August 2010.

Public Comment Forum Link:

To review the Constituency Statements received by the working group, please see:

Constituency Statements on Vertical Integration

VI WG Charter

  • 10 March 2010 GNSO Council Resolution Approving the Vertical Integration (VI) Charter:

Whereas, on 28 January 2010, the GNSO Council approved a policy development process (PDP) on the topic of vertical integration between registries and registrars;
Whereas, the GNSO Council created a drafting team for the purposes of drafting a charter to fulfill the requirements of the PDP; and,
Whereas the drafting team completed its work and presented its charter proposal to the GNSO Council on Friday Feb 26, 2010.
Whereas, the GNSO Council has reviewed the proposed charter to guide the working group in its PDP activities;
Resolved, that the GNSO Council approves the following charter:
Resolved further, that the GNSO Council appoints Stephane van Gelder to be the GNSO Council Liaison to the Vertical Integration Working group (VI WG).
Resolved further, that the GNSO Council directs that a working group be formed to perform the work of the VI WG, and that the VI WG shall initiate its activities within 14 days after the approval of this motion. Until such time as the WG can select a chair and that chair can be confirmed by the GNSO Council, the GNSO Council Liaison shall act as interim chair.
Resolved further, that the WG is directed to develop a version of objective 5 and to recommend it to the Council within three weeks for either (a) Council approval of the WG-recommended Objective 5 or (b) Council vote on which version of Objective 5 (as reflected in the draft Charter of March 10, 2010) should apply.



List of Working Group Volunteers


ICANN Board Resolution on Vertical Integration 12 March 2010:

Whereas, decisions about industry structure affect many aspects of the public interest – prices, service offerings, sources and uses of data, and more;
Whereas, ICANN has obtained several studies, and heard from Industry participants about the possible benefits and detriments of choices related to ownership integration or non-integration;
Whereas, the market for new gTLDs will be dynamic, and has yet to emerge. In particular, there are concerns about how industry structure could affect consumer data protection;
Whereas, the GNSO is in an active policy development process on the issue of Vertical Integration, and the Board does not want to create an environment in which it would be difficult to later harmonize the new gTLD marketplace with the GNSO policy result; and
Whereas, it is important to establish a baseline approach to registry-registrar separation for the new
gTLD process to move ahead.
Resolved (2010.03.12.17), within the context of the new gTLD process, there will be strict separation of entities offering registry services and those acting as registrars. No co-ownership will be allowed.
Resolved (2010.03.12.18), if a policy becomes available from the GNSO, and approved by the Board prior to the launch of the new gTLD program, that policy will be considered by the Board for adoption as part of the New gTLD Program.

  • No labels