[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion

Tue Apr 4 16:12:31 UTC 2017

ICANN did a campaign to promote new gTLDs in round one. The problem is that
very few saw/understood it. Five years after, new gTLDs start to be
understood by those "forced" to deal with them and the still very few to
launch a website with them. ICANN has no capacity/knowledge to raise
awareness for new gTLDs: registrars have tried for the past 5 years... In
fact, no one does.

If money is to be spend to raise awareness, I suggest to do it with those
who "are" on internet and LinkedIn is a good place for this.

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>
wrote:

> Kurt, all
>
>
>
> I believe ICANN have a responsibility to conduct some type of
> communication/awareness campaign as it related to new gTLDs under the 2012
> round, perhaps not explicitly to promote domain names but certainly to
> raise awareness about the program. I’m not sure whether this was baked into
> the 2007 policy or the AGB. I don’t believe this was ever done to anyone’s
> satisfaction and has been raised with ICANN during the last two GDD Summits
> as a universal awareness rather than a universal acceptance issue. We had
> some good interaction on the subject with the Board members present during
> the Summit in Amsterdam last year.
>
>
>
> I appreciate that some do not support the idea that ICANN should actively
> promote domain names, but I do believe that ICANN has a responsibility to
> inform consumers about the single most important change to the Internet in
> years. So just like the Australian Government and other governments have
> run consumer awareness campaigns about the changeover from analog to
> digital television, ICANN should be responsible for a consumer awareness
> campaign regarding the introduction of thousands of new TLDs. I have
> previously suggested this to Akram during interactions with the GDD and the
> GNSO Council and his response has been that ICANN cannot promote one TLD
> over another. During the same discussion James Bladel also suggested that
> ICANN has a responsibility to inform all consumers about any policy changes
> that have the potential to impact them, referring at the time to changes to
> verifying WHOIS that had been causing some issues at the time.
>
>
>
> I guess my question is if this PDP WG is the wrong place, as some suggest,
> to consider this as a policy issue—what would be the right place?
>
>
>
> Donna
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-
> bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Kurt Pritz
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 02, 2017 11:17 PM
> *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>; avri at apc.org
> *Cc:* gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion
>
>
>
> Hi Jeff, Avri, et al:
>
>
>
> I saw that this has been published. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/
> correspondence/diaz-to-atallah-et-al-14mar17-en.pdf
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_correspondence_diaz-2Dto-2Datallah-2Det-2Dal-2D14mar17-2Den.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=RTaBqz8dTcB5YLgS72pPgwrf_aISgWznTdJCQLIbsFg&s=sOJAk3oFHL4c3S5yrt0bxrRR8nQrP3y35I-xmZCcVmA&e=>
>
>
>
> The reason I am writing is in reference to the proposal that: “ICANN
> create a fund, to be seeded with US$3M at start-up, to promote universal
> awareness of new gTLDs to the general Internet user community, and
> universal acceptance of new gTLDs across the Internet.”
>
>
>
> In the past, when ICANN staff members have been asked in public fora to
> begin an effort to promote the use of domain names, the response has
> generally been that it is not ICANN’s role to promote the use of domain
> names and domain name registries.
>
>
>
> To me, this is not an operations question; this is a policy question.
>
>
>
> In the current environment, i.e., absent a policy statement, ICANN can
> easily proceed to take up the RySG recommendation, especially for this
> relatively small seed fund. I hope we all urge that ICANN do this.
>
>
>
> However, if ICANN hesitates to take up an awareness campaign regarding the
> benefits of domain names (Including how they can be used and their efficacy
> as a strategic tool), then a policy statement could direct such an action.
>
>
>
> ICANN is for two things, the allocation of domain names and IP addresses.
> Who else is to inform the largely ignorant public on the utility of domain
> names if not ICANN?
>
>
>
> All of us argued about how best to introduce and govern domain name usage
> - but we are all in favor of domain name uptake and the safe and stable
> growth of the domain name industry. All of us show up at ICANN meetings to
> talk about the best way to delegate and register names. If we and ICANN are
> not for their usage - why be part of this?
>
>
>
> Some of us were against the new gTLD program and others were not happy
> with the final policy or implementation. Does that mean they want to see
> the program fail? Of course not. The new gTLD program is the culmination of
> many years and many thousand people-hours of work.
>
>
>
> With tools and resources for promoting public understanding of domain
> names readily available, I don’t see how ICANN (the staff or the community)
> can sit idly by.  With the cash surplus in hand, as Patton said, “we are at
> the right time in the right place with the right instrument,” to do
> something to fortify the domain name system and industry.
>
>
>
> During the slow process of launching new TLDs, search, apps and social
> media became strong competition for domain name adoption. It is time for us
> champions of domain names to use the tools at our disposal, including a
> small portion of that excess application fee cash, to create public
> awareness about the domain name industry that we have created.
>
>
>
> My recommendation is that this PDP working group should form a team to
> consider this issue and make a separate recommendation to the GNSO Council
> in a timely manner. A separate team is justifiable because this effects the
> previous as well as the next round. I also think the current PDP working
> group can be more nimble as compared to the effort necessary to start a new
> policy discussion.
>
>
>
> That recommendation could simply be a statement that it *is * the role of
> ICANN to promote awareness of domain names and the benefits of competition
> and choice in the domain name industry.
>
>
>
> We can show that we can act.
>
>
>
> Kurt
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________
>
> Kurt Pritz
>
> kurt at kjpritz.com
>
> +1.310.400.4184 <+1%20310-400-4184>
>
> Skype: kjpritz
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
>

-- 
*Jean Guillon*
6 Boulevard du Général De Gaulle
92120 Montrouge
France

*Phone:* +33.631109837
*Skype & Twitter:* jeanguillon
*Web:* www.guillon.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20170404/f017d00a/attachment.html>