[CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement

Phil Buckingham phil at dotadvice.co.uk
Sat Jan 9 18:05:15 UTC 2016

+1 Steve. And will still be the reason d’etre of a  gTLD Round 2 @ 2017. Nothing should be discarded.






From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve DelBianco
Sent: 09 January 2016 16:10
To: Burr, Becky; Accountability Community
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement


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."


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.


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.   


Since it is in the bylaws, ICANN’s fulfillment of this commitment could be the subject of an IRP. 


And any changes to this commitment would be subject to veto by the empowered community.



From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Becky Burr <Becky.Burr at neustar.biz>
Date: Friday, January 8, 2016 at 2:10 PM
To: Accountability Community <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement


  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.

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.

        ISSUE: Paragraph 3 of the Affirmation of Commitments describes the goals of the AoC, saying:   

         "This document affirms key commitments by DOC and ICANN, including commitments to: …  (c) promote competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace….” 

Paragraph 9.3 of the AoC says:

          … If and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII or other language character sets) have been in operation for one year, ICANN 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 …. 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. 

          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)

  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.  

          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.  


Should an AoC provision specific to TLD expansion be leveraged to impose generalized, independent, and affirmative competition and consumer trust protection obligations on ICANN?

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? 




J. Beckwith Burr
Neustar, Inc./Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006
Office:+1.202.533.2932  Mobile:+1.202.352.6367 / <http://www.neustar.biz> neustar.biz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160109/2fdadc48/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list