[Gnso-newgtld-dg] - Issues / Recommendations Matrix and Executive Summary

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Wed Mar 18 21:28:54 UTC 2015


Hi,

I think that the program only served one set of  interests among the
Global Public Interests: It served the interests of businesses from the
global north.  I believe it  failed many other perspectives on the
Global Public Interests.

thanks

avri


On 18-Mar-15 15:52, Phil Buckingham wrote:
>
> Hi Avri,
>
>  
>
> Like Bret, I don’t understand your comments re Round 1.
>
> I think what Round 1 has proved ( although I admit it is very very
> early days ), is that the global public interest has been served, but
> the “ global public” is simply not aware ( yet) that 1400+ new gTLD
> have and will  open up the marketplace to the global public – the
> consumer , to give them  better  choice(s) , more competition (
> therefore lower prices ),better trust in the DNS. We now have IDNs in
> Arabic, Chinese, Hindu, Russian  for the developing BRIC economies.
>
> However I agree the Joint Applicant Support programme was a complete
> failure by ICANN, with only ONE application going through evaluation.
> I am sure others have already identified this problem. A new JAS 2
> programme will need to be developed / incorporated within Round 2
> application  processes and procedures and should, I feel, be added
> into the Matrix.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Phil
>
>  
>
> Phil Buckingham
>
> CEO, Dot Advice Limited
>
> Corporate Advisor, MultiLingual Internet Group Inc.
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:gnso-newgtld-dg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Avri Doria
> *Sent:* 18 March 2015 17:52
> *To:* gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-dg] - Issues / Recommendations Matrix and
> Executive Summary
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree one aspect of the Global Public Interest (GPI0 in one way of
> understanding GPI was indeed served as you describe below.
> The issue is that the GPI is broader than that and is something that
> needs specific work and specific focus.
>
> Both in understanding it in respect to gTLDs  and knowing how to take
> it into account in subsequent 'rounds'.
>
> I believe it is a top level issue that needs to dealt with in many
> respects.
>
> avri
>
> On 18-Mar-15 13:17, Bret Fausett wrote:
>
>     Avri, 
>
>     I’m not sure I understand this completely, so I am hoping you can
>     provide more details. My first reaction is that the global public
>     interest was served by expanding the choices available when
>     registering a domain name, bringing competition to the registry
>     services space, and allowing people and companies to name
>     themselves online with a label that provides greater semantic
>     meaning. I also have statistics that show me that a meaningful
>     number of registrations in Uniregistry TLDs come from countries
>     identified as “developing countries” under either the UN or IMF
>     definitions. To me, that’s a global public interest that was served.
>
>      
>
>     Now, I don’t propose to have that debate here, but is what I wrote
>     above addressed to your issue, or were you raising something else?
>     I think we already have identified issues around making sure that
>     future registries come from developing economies. 
>
>      
>
>              Bret
>
>      
>
>      
>
>         On Mar 18, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>         <mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>          
>
>         Hi
>
>         I think one whole group of issues is missing  from we need to
>         have dealt with in the review.
>
>         Did the gTLD server the pubic interest?  It what ways could it
>         have done this better?  In terms of the future how do we
>         design the policy to make sure that the global public
>         interests, such as inclusion of developing economies and poor
>         communities is supported?  This is one area where many
>         consider the gTLD to have bee na complete failure and to not
>         have that represented as a section of our work seems a deficit.
>
>
>         avri
>
>         On 16-Mar-15 12:50, Steve Chan wrote:
>
>             Dear DG Members,
>
>              
>
>             As discussed on today’s group call, staff is circulating
>             the updated Issues / Recommendations matrix that was last
>             edited by Jeff Neuman, along with his short explanation
>             regarding the proposed groupings he included in the
>             document (see below). I have also included his updated
>             Executive Summary. As noted by Jeff on the call, the
>             co-chairs request feedback by *30 Mar 2015* and preferably
>             before, so as to be able to include for discussion during
>             the DG call on 30 Mar 2015 at 14:00 UTC.
>
>              
>
>             Note, I have incorporated Philip Shepard’s proposed
>             changes into tab 2 of the attached Excel sheet.
>
>              
>
>              
>
>             "I refer to the Matrix that has Policies A-G, 1-20 and IG
>             A through IG-R.  With respect to the Potential New topics
>             I refer to Excel row number in that 2^nd  tab)
>
>              
>
>             _Group 1:  Overall Process / Support / Outreach :_  A, C,
>             1, 9, 10 (concept), 12 (Concept), 13, IG A, IG B, IG C, IG
>             D, IG E, IG I, IG M, IG N, IG O, IG Q, New Row 3)
>
>              
>
>             _Group 2:  Legal / Regulatory_: 5, 10 (substance), 14, 15,
>             16, 17, 19, IG J, IG K, IG L, New Row 2, New Row 4, New
>             Row 5, New Row 6
>
>              
>
>             _Group 3:  Contentions / Objections & Disputes:_  G, 2, 3,
>             6, 12, 20, IG F, IG H, IG P, IG R
>
>              
>
>             _Group 4:  Internationalized Domain Names_:  B, 18
>
>              
>
>             _Group 5:  Technical and Operations_:  D, E, F, 4, 7, 8,
>             New Row 7 (Name Collision)"
>
>              
>
>              
>
>             Best,
>
>              
>
>              
>
>              
>
>              
>
>             *Steven Chan*
>             Sr. Policy Manager
>
>             *ICANN
>             *12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>
>             Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>             steve.chan at icann.org
>             <mailto:steve.chan at icann.org>
>             direct: +1.310.301.3886
>             mobile: +1.310.339.4410
>
>             tel: +1.310.301.5800
>
>             fax: +1.310.823.8649
>
>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>
>             Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
>
>             Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
>
>             https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>
>
>
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         <http://www.avast.com/>
>
>         	
>
>         This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
>         software.
>         www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
>
>          
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
>         Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>
>      
>
>      
>
>
>     -- 
>
>     *Bret Fausett, Esq.*
>
>     General Counsel, Uniregistry, Corp.
>
>
>     12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 200
>
>     Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>
>     mobile +1 310 985 1351
>
>     office +1 949 706 2300 x4201
>
>     UTC -8 hours  • http://uniregistry.link
>
>      
>
>      
>
>      
>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list
>
>     Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-dg at icann.org>
>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-dg
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> 	
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
>
>  
>



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-dg/attachments/20150318/620aa380/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-dg mailing list