[gnso-gac-closed-generics] "A Public Interest" v. "The Global Public Interest" - Question / Comment on Asynchronous Work #6

[Jeff Neuman]

Kathy,

Thanks for this response, but I still see a dichotomy between ICANN acting in the Global Public Interest and new gTLDs serving a public interest goal.

ICANN can be acting in the Global Public Interest by allowing a gTLD that may only serve a local public interest.  For example an IDN intended to serve a local public interest I believe is in the Global Public Interest.  In other words, the TLDs themselves may not have to serve the global public interest directly, but allowing those that serve a public interest (whether global or not) to move forward, that indirectly supports the Global Public Interest.

Thus, I believe it would be the wrong standard for each new gTLD application for a closed generic to force us to determine whether or not they serve a global public interest (whatever that really means).

Sincerely,

Jeff


[cid:image001.png at 01D92CCF.BDB57AE0]
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
http://jjnsolutions.com


From: gnso-gac-closed-generics <gnso-gac-closed-generics-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Kathy Kleiman
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 12:23 PM
To: gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-gac-closed-generics] "A Public Interest" v. "The Global Public Interest" - Question / Comment on Asynchronous Work #6


Hi Jeff,
I’ll respond to your original message (and note that Philippe and Arnaud responded as well).
The reason we are talking about The Global Public Interest is because we have to.  The world has changed since 2013 when the GAC wording GAC Beijing Communique was far-seeing and far-reaching:  “For strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal. See https://gac.icann.org/advice/communiques/Beijing%20Communique%20april2013_Final-ar.pdf

A lot has happened since then, including ICANN’s Transition from US Government oversight.  As part of the Transition, the Community took on clear new obligations including “Core Values” of the Bylaws, and Core Value 1.2(b)(ii), that we work to “ascertain the global public interest.”  https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article1

Board Member Avri Doria, as you know, has been working hard “Operationalizing the concept of the global public interest (GPI)” that ICANN is now bound to follow.  ICANN continued this important work through COVID, putting out a paper in 2019, receiving comments, and publishing an updated version in 2020.  I cite from the April 2020 paper for the quote in the prior sentence,  https://community.icann.org/display/prjxplrpublicint/GPI+Toolkit

Our Asynchronous Work #4, titled GPI Framework and Closed Generic TLDs, is exactly what the Board asked us to do.  The wording in our diagrams seems to be very appropriate. “This framework is anchored in the Articles and Bylaws,” Avri wrote in the GPI April 2020 paper.

I believe this Core Value was inspired by the GAC in the Beijing Advice a decade ago.  We now have two public interest guideposts and ascertaining the Global Public Interest is certainly one of them.

Best,
Kathy
On 1/16/2023 5:05 PM, Jeff Neuman wrote:
All,

On Asynchronous Work #6, there are several references to “The Global Public Interest” and the reason why I had a hard time with completing this work was in reference to that particular term.  In the GAC’s formal advice in Beijing (April 2023) the GAC advised: “For strings representing generic terms, exclusive registry access should serve a public interest goal.”  See https://gac.icann.org/advice/communiques/Beijing%20Communique%20april2013_Final-ar.pdf

The Advice mentions “a public interest goal.”  I view that as VERY different that serving “the Global Public Interest”.  It is very possible (at least in my mind) that an application for a closed generic may serve a public interest goal without serving “the Global Public Interest.”  In other words, a closed generic my support a local public interest goal or the public interest of one particular country, etc. but when viewed on a Global Scale may not qualify.

I don’t know where or why we started equating those terms, but I think we should go back to serving “a public interest” as opposed to “the Global Public Interest”.  There has been no agreement within the group to broaden that narrow GAC Advice.

Thanks.


[cid:image001.png at 01D92CCF.BDB57AE0]
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
http://jjnsolutions.com





_______________________________________________

gnso-gac-closed-generics mailing list

gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org<mailto:gnso-gac-closed-generics at icann.org>

https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-gac-closed-generics



_______________________________________________

By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-gac-closed-generics/attachments/20230120/f41576f9/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 67520 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-gac-closed-generics/attachments/20230120/f41576f9/image001-0001.png>