[CCWG-ACCT] Concern over Proposed Core Value 5 (as per CCWG ACCT 82 discussion)

Wed Feb 3 17:46:15 UTC 2016

Dear Becky,

the way the sentence is constructed is somehow ambiguous:
""Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain
names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest as
identified through the bottom-up,  multistakeholder policy development
process."

So it is the "public interest" that should be identified through the
bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process, not the
introduction and promotion of competition. Are you asserting this should
be done through a PDP?

Also, please be so kind to clarify the "potentially unintended
consequences flowing from breaking the link"

Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 03/02/2016 17:28, Burr, Becky wrote:
> I’m sorry, I just do not see how this could possibly be read to
> preclude the African, Latin American, or Caribbean strategy.  I think
> that there are potentially significant unintended consequences flowing
> from breaking the link that says the global public interest is
> identified through the bottom up, multistakeholder policy development
> process.  
>
> *J. Beckwith Burr****
> **Neustar, Inc.***/**Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
> *Office:***+1.202.533.2932  *Mobile:***+1.202.352.6367
> */**neustar.biz* <http://www.neustar.biz>
>
>
> From: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org.tn
> <mailto:tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org.tn>>
> Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 7:45 AM
> To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>>
> Cc: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Concern over Proposed Core Value 5 (as per
> CCWG ACCT 82 discussion)
>
> Alan and all,
>
> I agree with you and prefer your first proposal, but can live with the
> second one assuming that « and specifically » be replaced by «  mainly ». 
>   
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
> Executive Director
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
> Phone: +216 98 330 114
>             +216 52 385 114
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> Le 3 févr. 2016 à 05:09, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
>> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>> a écrit :
>>
>> At the meeting last night, I raised an issue related to the proposed
>> Core Value 6. It was also raised in an e-mail several days earlier,
>> but that did not attract any comments.
>>
>> In the current Bylaws, Core Value 6 reads:
>>
>> "Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain
>> names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest."
>>
>> The proposed version (now Core Value 5) is:
>>
>> "Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain
>> names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest as
>> identified through the bottom-up,  multistakeholder policy
>> development process."
>>
>> In the context of the Bylaws, the expression "policy development
>> process" is used only in the context of the ccNSO and GNSO PDPs. The
>> problem is that not everything that ICANN does is "policy", and
>> certainly not developed by the GNSO and ccNSO.
>>
>> An example is the Strategy for Africa that was initiated in 2012 and
>> by all reports is having very positive results. One of ICANN's
>> strategic goals is to improve participation from the African region.
>> An essential part of this is to build up the DNS industry there. The
>> African strategy was certainly developed through a bottom-up MS
>> process, but just as certainly not through a "policy development
>> process" as described in the ICANN Bylaws.
>>
>> Under the proposed wording, part of the African Strategy could be
>> rules out of order, and the same goes for the Latin-America &
>> Caribbean Strategy. I have to assume that this is not the intent of
>> the CCWG.
>>
>> I would be happy to simply replace "the bottom-up,  multistakeholder
>> policy development process" by "a bottom-up, multistakeholder process".
>>
>> However, for those who worry that this might be an escape hatch
>> related to the GNSO and ccNSO PDPs, another alternative is:
>>
>> "Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain
>> names where practicable and beneficial in the public interest as
>> identified through bottom-up,  multistakeholder processes and
>> specifically the policy development processes when applicable to GNSO
>> and ccNSO policies."
>>
>> But I really feel that this is to much detail for a Bylaw Core Value!
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_accountability-2Dcross-2Dcommunity&d=CwQFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJFOifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=SuJ3nLhK2VF3QCvO-vpM69BZ7nYz9DnU2a07UIB7ecA&s=427V5ijMF4DHDCebM1hW5rQRWxpeao1CNXncuzTeW-I&e=>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160203/6646fe1d/attachment-0001.html>