Changes

The most current and contentious debate between the Registry Stakeholder group and ICANN has been over the [[Registry Agreement]] related to New gTLD operators. Many members can be seen to represent not only their own applications but those of their clients, though forthcoming registry operators have also formed the separate [[NTAG|New TLD Applicant Group]] within ICANN.  

The most current and contentious debate between the Registry Stakeholder group and ICANN has been over the [[Registry Agreement]] related to New gTLD operators. Many members can be seen to represent not only their own applications but those of their clients, though forthcoming registry operators have also formed the separate [[NTAG|New TLD Applicant Group]] within ICANN.  

The RySG seems to be most strongly opposed to ICANN's attempt to integrate a "unilateral right to amend" into the Registry Agreement. The point would give the [[ICANN Board]] to amend the Agreement with a 2/3 majority vote, under the current registry agreement special amendments  need the approval of registries representing two-thirds of all registry fees paid to ICANN before they became law. The RySG claims that ICANN is essentially doing away with the bottom-up multistakeholder model in favor of a restructuring that does not rely on [[GNSO]] policy development. ICANN and its defenders claim that the change is necessary given the large amount of new registries to be created and prepare for any future Registry Agreements, where getting hundreds of operators to agree will be near impossible as evidenced by the 18 months spent working on the most recent [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] (RAA). The RAA put forth by ICANN around the same time as the Registry Agreement has an identical "unilateral right to amend" clause.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11850-icann-seeks-more-power-over-new-gtld-registries ICANN Seeks More Power Over New gTLD Registries, DomainIncite.com] 1 April 2013</ref>

The RySG seems to be most strongly opposed to ICANN's attempt to integrate a "unilateral right to amend" into the Registry Agreement. The point would give the [[ICANN Board]] to amend the Agreement with a 2/3 majority vote, under the current registry agreement special amendments  need the approval of registries representing two-thirds of all registry fees paid to ICANN before they became law. The RySG claims that ICANN is essentially doing away with the bottom-up multistakeholder model in favor of a restructuring that does not rely on [[GNSO]] policy development.<ref>[http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-base-agreement-05feb13/pdf9aMq5amCU0.pdf Comments Base Agreement 05Feb2013, Forum.ICANN.org] Retrieved 1 April 2013</ref> ICANN and its defenders claim that the change is necessary given the large amount of new registries to be created and prepare for any future Registry Agreements, where getting hundreds of operators to agree will be near impossible as evidenced by the 18 months spent working on the most recent [[Registrar Accreditation Agreement]] (RAA). The RAA put forth by ICANN around the same time as the Registry Agreement has an identical "unilateral right to amend" clause.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/11850-icann-seeks-more-power-over-new-gtld-registries ICANN Seeks More Power Over New gTLD Registries, DomainIncite.com] 1 April 2013</ref>

 

== Organization and Membership of the RySG ==

== Organization and Membership of the RySG ==