[bc-gnso] Declarations of Interest within the BC: New gTLD Expression of Interest Working Group -- looking ahead

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Marilyn S. Cade


202 360 1196  or   202 251 6787

mscade@xxxxxxx or marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx


I am reading the "expression of Interest' materials, that Mike Palage 
thoughtfully forwarded to the BC list. 
While in general, I can see the merit of such a working group, it needs to be 
open to participation by representatives of the CSG -- and those 
representatives need to be carefully chosen from members who are not engaged 
in, consulting with, nor representing parties with an interest in applying for 
a new gTLD.  

When a member develops a change in status and becomes affiliated with registry 
applicants, that change then becomes a significant change and creates a 
conflict of interest that needs to be  disclosed to the BC members.
Frankly, I fully appreciate that it is getting very difficult to find business 
representatives who are indeed business users -- and not either consulting with 
registry applicants, or considering the issue of becoming a 'brands' registry 
if they are a global brand.  I am interested in identifying a few global brands 
representatives within the BC to develop a paragraph for the Charter that might 
be shared with members to see if we can carefully craft a category/'guidance' 
on when a global brand holder becomes a registry, and how they might still 
quality to be a BC member. Since most global brands -- IF they become a 
registry--will do so as an internally focused service -- their needs and roles 
will be very different from a market facing registry. 
We don't want to blow the BC up over the evolution of change in the development 
of new gTLDs; but we need to have some respect for the unique role of business 
users, or we really aren't adhering to the purpose, and intent of the existence 
of the BC. 
Still, for now, our charter [and the DRAFT Charter ] has certain requirements. 
So, three requests:
1) all BC members who are now in a different status need to declare their 
interests, and that needs to be disclosed to the BC members. 2) This group 
needs to be open to BC members who are not applicants, or consulting or 
advising applicants, beyond a single member3) The changes in the Charter that I 
proposed, and others supported are still pending. Many of our members -- 
Ayesha, Zahid, David Fares, Liesyl/Anders, Heather, myself, Steve, and possibly 
more -- will be leaving early to mid week for the IGF, which will take us 
totally out of commission for work on the Charter for several days. 
Mikey and I had offered to work with Philip to complete drafting. That offer 
stands, with the realistic perspective that I'm one of the IGF'ers. 
Marilyn From: michael@xxxxxxxxxx
To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bc-gnso] New gTLD Expression of Interest Working Group
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:12:49 -0500








Re: [bc-gnso] FW: [gnso-sti] Common Grounds Paper








Hello All:

 

Could the BC leadership please update the membership on this
proposed Working Group for Expressions of Interests in connection with new
gTLDs. 

 

It appears that Minds + Machines and other “TLD
promoters” have proposed a Working Group for new gTLD Expressions of
Interest.  While I have no objection to the creation of such a working
group, the proposal to limit participation to an apparent self-interested group
is rather concerning. Hopefully the new Council, and our elected
representatives will make sure that this Working Group is open to all that wish
to participate.

 

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/eoiwg-to-icann-06nov09-en.pdf
(Doc #1)

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/eoiwg-to-icann-draft-charter-06nov09-en.pdf
(Doc #2)

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/eoiwg-to-icann-proposed-outputs-06nov09-en.pdf
(Doc #3)

 

I am concerned that the BC
will only have one representative (See Doc #2), and this self-selected group
appears to have reached out unilaterally to Susan Kawaguchi. While I think
Susan would provide an  excellent participant I think all interested
members from the Commercial Stakeholder Group should be able to participate.

 

Best regards,

 

Michael Palage