<html>
<body>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Jonathan Zuck wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Agree with Steve here. We need
to keep core values minimal. This Christmas Tree is already getting
weighed down a bit too much for my
tastes.</blockquote></blockquote><br><br>
Alan Greenberg wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Oh I agree. But it got heavy a
long time ago. If we want to start stripping stuff out that we have
added, I am all for it. <br>
Why all this vehemence about this one item?</blockquote><br>
I would suggest that it's because (a) while we may not have reached a
tipping point of weighing down the Christmas Tree with so many values and
commitments that ICANN will be able, in effect, to do whatever it likes
itn the future, we're perilously close, and we should resist the
temptation to add any new ones (including this one). And (b) there
are far too many things ICANN would be able to justify (in good faith) as
being designed to "increase consumer trust" that would take it
very far from its core mission - instituting a program to investigate and
remedy false, fraudulent, or defamatory claims on websites, for
instance. <br><br>
David<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Alan<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">From:
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of
Steve DelBianco
<<a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>
><br>
Date: Saturday, January 9, 2016 at 11:10 AM<br>
To: Becky Burr
<<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>
>, Accountability Community
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission
Statement<br><br>
Our recommendation #9 is Incorporating the Affirmation of Commitments in
ICANN’s Bylaws. That includes commitments made by ICANN in
the AoC, such as the commitment cited by Becky, to "promote
competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS
marketplace."<br><br>
First, I don’t think we should casually discard any of those three
commitment items just because it is difficult to
define. The AoC review that’s just begun will develop
working definitions as part of its review.<br><br>
I would answer 'No' to both of Becky’s questions. This
commitment does not need to be part of Core Values, and could live in the
bylaws section describing the required AoC review of any expansion of new
gTLDs. <br><br>
Since it is in the bylaws, ICANN’s fulfillment of this commitment could
be the subject of an IRP. <br><br>
And any changes to this commitment would be subject to veto by the
empowered community.<br><br>
<br>
From:
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of
Becky Burr
<<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>
><br>
Date: Friday, January 8, 2016 at 2:10 PM<br>
To: Accountability Community
<<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission
Statement<br><br>
<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>
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>
<b>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 trust,
and consumer choice in the </font>DNS
marketplace<font color="#333333">.”</font>
<dd>Paragraph 9.3 of the AoC says:
<dd> <font color="#333333">
IIf and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII or 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> 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>
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>
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>
QUESTIONS:<br>
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>
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>
J. Beckwith Burr<br>
Neustar, Inc./Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
Office:+1.202.533.2932 Mobile:+1.202.352.6367
/<a href="http://www.neustar.biz">neustar.biz</a><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>_______________________________________________<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><br>
*******************************<br>
David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America
Foundation<br>
blog (Volokh Conspiracy)
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post" eudora="autourl">
http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post<br>
</a>book (Jefferson's Moose)
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0" eudora="autourl">
http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n </a> <br>
music
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic" eudora="autourl">
http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic</a> publications etc.
<a href="http://www.davidpost.com/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.davidpost.com </a> <br>
******************************* </body>
</html>