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

[Matthew Shears]

Thanks Steve - if there is agreement that these are suitable definitions 
perhaps we can have the report refer to them so as to avoid confusion as 
to scope, etc.

On 10/01/2016 15:07, Steve DelBianco wrote:
> Please see these working definitions of ‘Consumer' and 'Consumer 
> Trust', from the 2012 Working Group that defined measures and metrics 
> for the AoC Review of the 2012 gTLD expansion (link 
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-05dec12-en.pdf> 
> to WG report, page 5):
>
>     *Consumer* is defined as actual and potential Internet users and
>     registrants.
>
>     *Consumer Trust* is defined as the confidence Consumers have in
>     the domain name system. This includes
>
>         (i) trust in the consistency of name resolution
>         (ii) confidence that a TLD registry operator is fulfilling the
>         Registry’s stated purpose and is complying with ICANN policies
>         and applicable national laws and
>         (iii) confidence in ICANN’s compliance function.
>
>     *Consumer Choice* is defined as the range of options available to
>     Consumers for domain scripts and languages, and for TLDs that
>     offer meaningful choices as to the proposed purpose and integrity
>     of their domain name registrants.
>
>     *Competition* is defined as the quantity, diversity, and the
>     potential for and actual market rivalry of TLDs, TLD registry
>     operators, and registrars.
>
>
> That WG was created per a Dec-2010 Board resolution (link 
> <http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-10dec10-en.htm>) 
> requesting advice from the GNSO, ccNSO, ALAC and GAC on establishing 
> the definition, measures, and three-year targets for competition, 
> consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the DNS in 
> preparation for the AoC required review of the 2012 gTLD expansion.
> The WG's final report 
> <http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/cctc/cctc-final-advice-letter-05dec12-en.pdf> 
> was adopted by its chartering organizations, GNSO and ALAC, with ALAC 
> adding several additional measures.
>
> I believe these definitions are appropriate and workable for purposes 
> of reviewing ICANN’s remit in expanding the gLTD space. They aren’t 
> universal definitions to apply for everything ICANN does, but
>
>
>
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf 
> of Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net <mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>>
> Date: Saturday, January 9, 2016 at 3:32 PM
> To: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>" 
> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org 
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] "Consumer Trust" in the Mission Statement
>
> "Furthermore,under EU law, the notion of consumer does not extend to
> legal persons, even if they have a non-business character (e.g.
> non-profit associations).
>
> The Court of Justice has consis-
> tently held that EU definitions of consumer must
> not be given a wider interpretation."
>
> On 01/09/2016 10:30 PM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>
>     The definition of 'consumer' in this is problematic.
>
>     In EU legislation it generally excludes businesses.  A common
>     understanding would be a 'natural person acting outside the scope
>     of an
>     economic activity'.
>
>
>
>     On 01/09/2016 09:56 PM, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
>
>         Hello Malcolm,
>
>                 Even if rephrased, I don't think I understand what is
>                 intended to be
>                 meant by "consumer trust".
>
>
>         It is a general term like human rights and public interest.
>
>         I think the key is that it needs to be grounded in what it
>         means for
>         ICANN's limited mission.
>
>         If we are talking about domain names it could be that:
>
>         - a domain name resolves deterministically to a particular
>         resource
>         connected to the Internet
>
>         (the implementation of DNSSEC at the root was intended to help
>         with that)
>
>         - there is a legal person that can be contacted when there is a
>         problem with the operation of the  domain name
>
>         (the collection and publication of contact information was
>         intended to
>         help with that)
>
>         What it should not be in my personal view:
>
>         - anything to do with the content of a website that might be
>         referred
>         to by the domain name
>
>         - anything to do with the characteristics of a legal person
>         associated
>         with a domain name that might be inferred from the name
>
>
>         Regards,
>         Bruce Tonkin
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>         Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>         <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>         https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org 
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-- 

Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
mshears at cdt.org
+ 44 771 247 2987



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160111/dc1af2c5/attachment-0001.html>