RE: [nc-budget] Invoice for AFNIC services to the DNSO in year 2000

["Cochetti, Roger" <RCochetti@verisign.com>]

Peter-

If you object to the procedure, I will reverse it.  It was my impression
that we spent an inordinate amount of time agreeing to make the payment and
the only question is did they meet the conditions....which they seem to have
clearly done to me.

But if you think we should have an affirmative vote on whether they have met
the conditions, I in no way object.  I was simply trying to reduce air time
on this.

Roger

Roger J. Cochetti
Senior Vice-President & Chief Policy Officer
VeriSign
(202) 973-6600
rcochetti@verisign.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: Peter de Blanc [mailto:pdeblanc@usvi.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 6:30 PM
To: 'Cochetti, Roger'; 'Nc-Budget (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: [nc-budget] Invoice for AFNIC services to the DNSO in year
2000


Roger, even though you will "pay unless there is an objection"

I will still like it on the record that I agree to the payment, and it
should go with a letter (hard copy, wet signature, suitable for framing)
to AFNIC expressing our thanks for the year(s) of service.

Peter de Blanc

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nc-budget@dnso.org [mailto:owner-nc-budget@dnso.org] On
Behalf Of Cochetti, Roger
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 9:48 AM
To: Nc-Budget (E-mail)
Subject: [nc-budget] Invoice for AFNIC services to the DNSO in year 2000


As you will recall, earlier this year, at the request of the Budget
Committee, the Names Council approved an expenditure of $59,000 to AFNIC
for the services that AFNIC had provided to the DNSO during 2000.  The
DNSO's actual payment to AFNIC was made contingent upon AFNIC's meeting
three conditions, however.

In the attached notice, AFNIC advises us that they have met the three
conditions and now ask that full payment be made to them.

In my judgment, their no-charge service along with the attached
documents meets the conditions that we imposed on the payment to them,
particularly given that we did not specify any details on these
conditions (e.g. we did not make the meeting of these conditions by
AFNIC subject to our being satisfied with the details.) and there is no
dispute over the fact that the DNSO has owed AFNIC $59,000 for over six
months.

Since this appears fairly straightforward to me, I will not ask for the
Committee's affirmation.  

However, if any member of the Committee objects to our accepting these
AFNIC materials and making payment to AFNIC, then I will ask for a
Committee vote.

So please let me know by 17 October if you have any objections to making
immediate full payment to AFNIC. 


Roger J. Cochetti
Senior Vice President & Chief Policy Officer
VeriSign
rcochetti@verisign.com
202-973-6600


-----Original Message-----
From: Elisabeth Porteneuve [mailto:Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 4:48 PM
To: rcochetti@verisign.com
Cc: Eric BARBRY; jean-yves.babonneau@nic.fr; annie.renard@nic.fr;
elisabeth.porteneuve@nic.fr; benoit.guignard@nic.fr
Subject: Invoice for AFNIC services to the DNSO in year 2000


To: Roger Cochetti
NC Budget Committee Chair,


Paris, 26 September 2001

Dear Roger,

Please find attached three documents:
    1. Invoice for AFNIC services to the DNSO in year 2000
    2. Introduction letter related to 3 conditions attached to this
invoice
    3. A document prepared in July 2001 by Eric Barbry, AFNIC Legal
Counsel, stating a nonexclusive transfer of the software and the
intellectual property rights to the software developed by myself for
DNSO usage.

The third document was sent to Louis Touton on 26th July.

I am confident these three documents satisfy the request from the Budget
Committee presented to AFNIC and myself. Please let me know if any
further clarifications are needed.

My best regards,
Elisabeth Porteneuve