Re: [Ianaplan] Transition proposal for naming-related functions

[John Curran <[e-mail]>]

On May 4, 2015, at 4:56 PM, Steve Crocker <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Alyssa, Tobias, et al,

We normally take time internally to coordinate our formal statements, but I consider this particular detail to be unambiguous, settled long ago, and something I spoke forcefully about at the IETF meeting in London, so I’ll speak immediately on this list.

ICANN publishes the IANA registries for anyone to use without charge, and it asserts no ownership or control of the information in the registries.  No matter what additional structures are created, this basic rule must continue.  There are no subtle or hidden meanings here, and if anyone manages to see an ambiguity, I can assure you none is intended and we will be happy to restate this in language that removes the perceived ambiguity.  Anything less would be inconsistent with the spirit, history and ethic of the IANA function.

Steve -

That good to know, and matches the expectations stated in the Internet number community’s proposal
for IANA Stewardship Transition planning (i.e. the CRISP team proposal) -

               "It is important that the IPR status of the registries remains clear and ensures free and unrestricted access to the public registry data throughout the stewardship transition. It is the expectation of the Internet Number Community that the IANA Number Registries are in the public domain.

<https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/ICG-RFP-Number-Resource-Proposal.pdf>

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN