<html>
<body>
Before my substantive reply to this thread, I note that the text on the
AoC Review on Promoting Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice
(CCTCC) seems to have been omitted from Annex 9 (between the SSR review
starting at para 98 and the Whois review starting at para 112 (which
should be in bold), jumping from Review 2 to Review 4). Since no one
seems to have noticed, I have to wonder what else was lost in this
revision?<br><br>
If the text for this review had been there, it would have said (taken
from the 2nd draft proposal) <br><br>
"566 ICANN will ensure that as it expands the Top-Level Domain (TLD)
space, it will adequately address issues of competition, consumer
protection, security, stability and resiliency, malicious abuse issues,
sovereignty concerns, and rights protection."<br><br>
and<br><br>
"569 This Review will examine the extent to which the expansion of
gTLDs has promoted competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice, as
well as effectiveness of:"<br><br>
Clearly this review is focused on the EXPANSION of the namespace.
However, the vast percentage of names in use now and probably for the
foreseeable future are not associated with the expansion. Omitting the
issue from the core serves to disenfranchise the consumers who use those
names (that is, the bulk of all Internet use).<br><br>
I agree with those who say that the term may be hard to define, quantify
and measure. That is true with many things we value in life. But it does
make them less important. Regardless, the term is used twice in the Whois
Review section of the proposed Bylaws as well as in the missing CCTCC
section. The lack of a definition does not preclude its use there and
certainly we cannot omit the expression in a wholesale manner because of
the lack of a definition or metrics.<br><br>
We have said that much of what we are doing in in this CCWG is not to
control the current Board or management, but to ensure that as time goes
forward, we can ensure that veer off course. This is exactly such a
situation. The formal Mission of Contractual Compliance is "To
preserve the security, stability and resiliency of the Domain Name System
and to promote consumer trust."
(<a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en" eudora="autourl">
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-2014-10-10-en</a>). In the
past, Compliance has been accused of only enforcing certain aspects of
its contracts and specifically not the parts that would often impact
consumers (such as Whois issues and issues related to improper domain
name transfers or hijacking). Thankfully that is no longer the case, but
we need to ensure that the "bad old times" do not return.
Capturing the concept of consumer trust in ICANN's mission is exactly how
we can do so. The Contractual Compliance mission statement can be changed
at will with no notice or community consultation. Embedding the concept
in ICANN's mission provides the protection that is needed.<br><br>
Alan<br><br>
<br>
At 09/01/2016 12:12 PM, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Steve, I tend to agree with
Malcolm in saying that whenever, we do not have a xclear definition nor a
descrition for an item what is the usefulness of its inclusion in BYLAWS
?<br>
The difficulties that I have is , we may include many thing in the
Mission and/or Bylaws, but when ICANN wants / required to implement
that it would face difficulties to do so. Even if ICANN claims that it
has had implemented, it is difficult to check the validity of that
claim.<br>
Regards<br>
Kavouss <br><br>
2016-01-09 14:16 GMT+01:00 David Post
<<a href="mailto:david.g.post@gmail.com">david.g.post@gmail.com</a>
>:<br>
<dl>
<dd>I do not think that the addition of this language is a good
idea. Lengthening the list of 'values' and 'commitments' that ICANN
is supposed to implement will inevitably weaken the Mission
Statement. The more the document suggests that it is ICANN's job to
balance a wide variety of different concerns - enhancing competition and
consumer choice, supporting geographic and cultural diversity, promoting
human rights and the global public interest - the easier it becomes for
ICANN to justify pretty much anything it might do in the future as
promoting one or another of these broad goals. The point that
Andrew Sullivan made recently in connection with the discussions about
the GPI is applicable here, I think:<br><br>
<dd>"ICANN should pay attention to its well-understood and needed
functions. It should not go adventuring out into global governance
issues that<br>
<dd>distract from that narrow set of responsibilities. And it
should not embrace language that distracts from the narrow
responsibilities --<br>
<dd>lest such language become an attractive nuisance that encourages
people to think ICANN has power it never has had"<br><br>
<dd>David<br><br>
<br>
<dd>At 04:10 PM 1/8/2016, Burr, Becky wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<dd><font face="Calibri"> </font> As discussed in our call
yesterday, we would like to get some discussion started on some of the
issues with the Mission Statement, Commitments & Core Values elements
of the CCWG Proposal. One of those issues relates to the inclusion
of the concept of promoting “consumer trust” in the Commitments
and/or Core Values. The USCIB comment, for example, urged inclusion
of a Commitment/Core Value of “promoting competition, consumer trust,
and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace.” ALAC urged inclusion
of the consumer trust language.<br>
<dd>This is the topic we will discuss on Monday, during the Ad Hoc
meeting just announced. Feel free to contribute your views in this
thread, particularly if you are not going to be able to participate on
Monday.<br>
<dd> ISSUE</b>: Paragraph 3 of the
Affirmation of Commitments describes the goals of the AoC,
saying:
<dl>
<dd> "This document
affirms key commitments by DOC and ICANN, including commitments to:
<font color="#333333"> (c) promote competition, consumer ttrust,
and consumer choice in the </font>DNS
marketplace<font color="#333333">.”</font>
<dd>Paragraph 9.3 of the AoC says:
<dd>
<font color="#333333"> If and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII oor other
language character sets) have been in operation for one year,
</font>ICANN<font color="#333333"> will organize a review that will
examine the extent to which the introduction or expansion of gTLDs has
promoted competition, consumer trust and consumer choice .
</font>>ICANN will organize a further review of its execution of the
above commitments two years after the first review, and then no less
frequently than every four years.
</dl>
<dd> In the Initial
Draft Proposal, this AoC language was transposed into the Core Values by
requiring ICANN to depend “on market mechanisms to proote and sustain a
healthy competitive environment in the DNS market that enhances consumer
trust and choice.” (Para 107, page 27 Initial Draft Proposal)<br>
<dd> In the 2nd Draft Proposal we elected to delete the reference
to consumer trust in the Mission statement and include it in the Review
section of the Bylaws (See 3rd Report, Appendix 9, Para. 33). The
reason we agreed to make this switch was because it is not a standalone
ICANN commitment in the AoC, rather, it is specifically tied to new gTLD
expansion and specifically tied to a required review. <br>
<dd> Several
commenters in both the 2nd and 3rd comment round argued that the Core
Values should specifically call out consumer trust. Some have
disputed my characterization of Paragraph 3 of the AoC (i.e., it states
the goals of the AoC but does not recite a specific commitment), on the
grounds that my characterization is an opinion and not a fact.
<br>
<dd>QUESTIONS:<br>
<dd>Should an AoC provision specific to TLD expansion be leveraged to
impose generalized, independent, and affirmative competition and consumer
trust protection obligations on ICANN?<br>
<dd>Does ICANN’s fundamental Mission to ensure “stable and secure
operation” of the DNS, and its various Commitments (i.e., to use
processes that enable
competition,
and to preserve stability, reliability, security, global
interoperability, resilience, and openness) adequately address this
concern? <br><br><br>
<dd>J. Beckwith Burr <br>
<dd>Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy
Officer<br>
<dd>1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
<dd>Office: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932">+1.202.533.2932</a>
Mobile: <a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367">+1.202.352.6367</a> /
<a href="http://www.neustar.biz">neustar.biz</a><br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</blockquote><br>
<dd>*******************************<br>
<dd>David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America
Foundation<br>
<dd>blog (Volokh Conspiracy)
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post">
http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post<br>
</a>
<dd>book (Jefferson's Moose)
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0">
http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n </a><br>
<dd>music
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic%A0">
http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic </a>publications etc.
<a href="??">
http://www.davidpost.com
</a><br>
<dd>******************************* <br><br>
<dd>_______________________________________________<br>
<dd>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<dd><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<dd>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
<br><br>
</dl><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org<br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" eudora="autourl">
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a>
</blockquote></body>
</html>