[CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement
Matthew Shears
mshears at cdt.org
Mon Jan 11 10:44:09 UTC 2016
Thanks Steve - if there is agreement that these are suitable definitions
perhaps we can have the report refer to them so as to avoid confusion as
to scope, etc.
On 10/01/2016 15:07, Steve DelBianco wrote:
> Please see these working definitions of ‘Consumer' and 'Consumer
> Trust', from the 2012 Working Group that defined measures and metrics
> for the AoC Review of the 2012 gTLD expansion (link
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-05dec12-en.pdf>
> to WG report, page 5):
>
> *Consumer* is defined as actual and potential Internet users and
> registrants.
>
> *Consumer Trust* is defined as the confidence Consumers have in
> the domain name system. This includes
>
> (i) trust in the consistency of name resolution
> (ii) confidence that a TLD registry operator is fulfilling the
> Registry’s stated purpose and is complying with ICANN policies
> and applicable national laws and
> (iii) confidence in ICANN’s compliance function.
>
> *Consumer Choice* is defined as the range of options available to
> Consumers for domain scripts and languages, and for TLDs that
> offer meaningful choices as to the proposed purpose and integrity
> of their domain name registrants.
>
> *Competition* is defined as the quantity, diversity, and the
> potential for and actual market rivalry of TLDs, TLD registry
> operators, and registrars.
>
>
> That WG was created per a Dec-2010 Board resolution (link
> <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-10dec10-en.htm>)
> requesting advice from the GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC and GAC on establishing
> the definition, measures, and three-year targets for competition,
> consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the DNS in
> preparation for the AoC required review of the 2012 gTLD expansion.
> The WG's final report
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-05dec12-en.pdf>
> was adopted by its chartering organizations, GNSO and ALAC, with ALAC
> adding several additional measures.
>
> I believe these definitions are appropriate and workable for purposes
> of reviewing ICANN’s remit in expanding the gLTD space. They aren’t
> universal definitions to apply for everything ICANN does, but
>
>
>
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf
> of Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net <mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>>
> Date: Saturday, January 9, 2016 at 3:32 PM
> To: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>"
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement
>
> "Furthermore,under EU law, the notion of consumer does not extend to
> legal persons, even if they have a non-business character (e.g.
> non-profit associations).
>
> The Court of Justice has consis-
> tently held that EU definitions of consumer must
> not be given a wider interpretation."
>
> On 01/09/2016 10:30 PM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>
> The definition of 'consumer' in this is problematic.
>
> In EU legislation it generally excludes businesses. A common
> understanding would be a 'natural person acting outside the scope
> of an
> economic activity'.
>
>
>
> On 01/09/2016 09:56 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
>
> Hello Malcolm,
>
> Even if rephrased, I don't think I understand what is
> intended to be
> meant by "consumer trust".
>
>
> It is a general term like human rights and public interest.
>
> I think the key is that it needs to be grounded in what it
> means for
> ICANN's limited mission.
>
> If we are talking about domain names it could be that:
>
> - a domain name resolves deterministically to a particular
> resource
> connected to the Internet
>
> (the implementation of DNSSEC at the root was intended to help
> with that)
>
> - there is a legal person that can be contacted when there is a
> problem with the operation of the domain name
>
> (the collection and publication of contact information was
> intended to
> help with that)
>
> What it should not be in my personal view:
>
> - anything to do with the content of a website that might be
> referred
> to by the domain name
>
> - anything to do with the characteristics of a legal person
> associated
> with a domain name that might be inferred from the name
>
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160111/dc1af2c5/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list