[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanisms

[Sam Lanfranco]

James, I never suggested that. Just suggested that there may be demand 
for a new not-for-profit/community focused gTLD.
Did suggest that an */arm's length/* experienced Mechanism could be 
useful in a grants distribution role.

Sam L.

On 11/27/2019 7:24 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>
> ICANN or its affilates running a registry Section 2.2 of the ICANN 
> bylaws states:
>
> *Section 2.2. RESTRICTIONS*
>
> ICANN shall not act as a Domain Name System Registry or Registrar or 
> Internet Protocol Address Registry in competition with entities 
> affected by the policies of ICANN. Nothing in this _Section 2.2_ is 
> intended to prevent ICANN from taking whatever steps are necessary to 
> protect the operational stability of the Internet in the event of 
> financial failure of a Registry or Registrar or other emergency.
>
> *From: *Sam Lanfranco <sam at lanfranco.net>
> *Date: *Thursday, 28 November 2019 at 01:23
> *To: *James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>, "John R. Levine" 
> <johnl at iecc.com>
> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanisms
>
> James,
>
> Are there assumptions imputed here that have not been made?
> Are you saying that there is no possibility of new gTLDs?
> Which part is forbidden?
>
> Sam L.
>
> On 11/27/2019 7:07 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>
>     This is forbidden by the ICANN bylaws which was the point that
>     John was making, and was a conscious decision to never ever allow
>     that scenario to happen.
>
>     *From: *Sam Lanfranco <sam at lanfranco.net> <mailto:sam at lanfranco.net>
>     *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanisms
>
>     Thanks James and John,
>
>     Here is an attempt to reformat my /Food for Thought/ long look
>     into the future.
>
>     There are two processes underway:
>
>       * This ccWG is dealing with an implementation mechanism, and
>         ranking Mechanisms, to handle a new gTLD auction proceeds
>         grants process.
>
>       * At ISOC, there is the pending sale of PIR and the .org
>         registry to a private investment group
>
>     Should the sale go through, time will tell the extent to which the
>     not-for-profit community feels that the .org registry is operating
>     in the public interest.
>
>     At the same time the selected Mechanism for handling the new gTLD
>     auction proceeds will have built up considerable expertise
>     managing grants.
>
>     If (and I stress “if”) there were demand for a new
>     not-for-profit/public interest gTLD, the registry would have to go
>     somewhere.  The Mechanism handling the new gTLD auction proceeds
>     would have a track record and may be in a good position to handle
>     a similar grants process. Could a Mechanism that is arm’s length
>     from ICANN also handle a registry? Yes, no, why not? It is an
>     acquired skill.
>
>     In conclusion I am raising two possibilities. One is that there
>     may be a need for a new not-for-profit public interest gTLD. The
>     other is that the Mechanism selected for the new gTLD auction
>     proceeds may have a useful second life, should a new gTLD come to
>     pass. Time will tell. As for betting on outcomes. I won't do that.
>
>     Sam Lanfranco
>
> -

-- 
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honored in an
  unjust state" -Confucius
  邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus), Econ, York U., CANADA
email: sam at lanfranco.net   Skype: slanfranco
blog:  https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20191127/4b0a021c/attachment.html>