RE: [nc-corp] PROPOSAL TO BUDGET COMMITTEE ON AFNIC REIMBURSEMENT FROM 2000

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

I support this proposal.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: Cochetti, Roger [mailto:RCochetti@verisign.com]
Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 5:19 PM
To: NC Budget Committee Confidential (E-mail)
Cc: 'Bruce Tonkin'
Subject: [nc-corp] PROPOSAL TO BUDGET COMMITTEE ON AFNIC REIMBURSEMENT
FROM 2000



You may recall that in 2000, AFNIC provided Website services to the DNSO
without having negotiated terms or an agreement in advance and in 2001, on
advice from the Budget Committee, the DNSO Names Council approved a payment
of $60K to AFNIC for the services provided by AFNIC to the DNSO during 2000.
This payment was conditioned on AFNIC meeting three conditions, one of which
--according to the ICANN General Counsel, who acted on behalf of the DNSO on
this matter-- they never met.  The unmet condition was that AFNIC was
obligated to turn over to the DNSO (ICANN acting as its agent) the
intellectual property rights to the software AFNIC had developed in
connection with AFNIC's services to the DNSO. (The software was mainly for
online voting.)  

The AFNIC employee involved in the development of this software took the
position that under French law, the rights to this intellectual property
(the software) belonged to her, not AFNIC, so AFNIC could not assign these
rights to the DNSO (actually ICANN, acting as an agent for the DNSO.)  The
ICANN General Counsel, acting on behalf of the DNSO, took the position that
under U.S. law, AFNIC as a contractor to ICANN (which was an agent for the
DNSO) did have the rights to the intellectual property and thus AFNIC could
assign those rights to ICANN (again, ICANN acting as an agent for the DNSO.)

Thus, the negotiations between the DNSO/ICANN and AFNIC has been stuck for
two years, AFNIC has not met the third condition of the DNSO's payment to
it, and the $60K funds have not been paid to AFNIC.  During this period, the
DNSO Secretariat has discontinued the use of the software that was created
by AFNIC for the DNSO in 2000, and the issue has become essentially
academic.

Under these circumstances, I'd like to propose that the Budget Committee
recommend to the Council at its next meeting that the Council remove any
remaining conditions to the payment of the $60K to AFNIC for the services
that AFNIC provided to the DNSO in 2000 and that the payment be made in
full; and the matter closed.

Since I would like to present this as a recommendation of the Budget
Committee to the Council (the $60K exceeds our spending authority), I am
asking for you to indicate whether you support, oppose, or abstain on my
proposal.

Thanks,

Roger Cochetti
Chair 
Names Council Budget Committee