RE: [bc-gnso] ICANN Expression of Interest Public Forum

["Ron Andruff" <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear colleagues,

 

In response to Mike Palage?s email below and EOI article, I believe that he
has put forward some good critical thinking for us all.  However, contrary
to his assertion that his comments are at the polar opposite of my EOI
posting, I am of like mind with regard to much that Mike has said.  

 

I take issue with the use of the terms ?front runners? and ?insiders? for
the simple reason that using such names are a cheap shot.  They are
insulting to many of us who put in the hours and hours of volunteer work
within ICANN (in my case, participating on the GNSO Operations Work Team and
the OSC, along with responding to BC issues).  It poses the question: Does
the fact that a regular participant in the debates and dialogues within the
BC and/or the greater ICANN community for the last decade earn one such
titles simply because they are also party to the new gTLD process?  If so, I
fear Mike may have tarred himself with his own brush.  But, at the end of
the day, all of that is of no relevance?

 

The bigger issue is this:  With ICANN having belabored the issue of
introducing new TLDs for years on end ? virtually from its inception until
now ? is it possible that anyone, any company, or any other entity
interested in this process doesn?t know about it?  For my part, I find that
hard to believe.  I believe that those who choose to hide behind this
strawman argument rather than engaging in a dialogue on ways forward, e.g.,
running processes in parallel, as is suggested by the very existence of the
EOI, are being obstructionist.

 

In closing, I would like to reiterate two things.  First, I am in agreement
with Mike that a principled way forward vis-à-vis the EOI is the ONLY way to
go.  I fully support that in whatever shape or form it should take.  Second,
I, too, am recommending that you post your comments!  Comments need to be
posted on both the EOI ­and DAG v3 changes/amendments.  I sense people are
tiring of the process and thus are becoming more willing to let things go
that they may have held strong feelings about.  This is tantamount to
abandoning our bottom up process, so I, like Mike, strongly encourage you to
post your positions to make sure that staff hears enough voices to draw
appropriate conclusions from, rather than having them make judgment calls.

 

Kind regards,


RA 

 

Ronald N. Andruff

RNA Partners, Inc.

220 Fifth Avenue, 20th floor

New York, New York 10001

 

www.rnapartners.com 

V: +1 212 481 2820 x 11

F:  +1 212 481 2859 

 

  _____  

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Michael D. Palage
Sent: 2009-11-18 20:03
To: 'bc - GNSO list'
Subject: [bc-gnso] ICANN Expression of Interest Public Forum

 

Hello All,

 

Listed below is an article that I wrote in connection with ICANN?s proposed
new gTLD Expression of Interest initiative. While I think there is some good
that could come of this proposal, as I have tried to articulate in this
article there is potentially a lot of bad, especially when you look at the
public forum which has basically been flooded by prospective TLD applicants.
There is less than 10 days before ICANN staff summarizes the public forum
input for consideration by the ICANN Board at its early December meeting.

 

As Mike Rodenbaugh previously noted there is probably not enough time for
the constituency to reach an opinion, and Ron Andruff has already taken a
position in line with the prospective TLD applicants which is kind of the
polar opposite to the position advocated in my paper.

 

This is kind of a big issue which appears to be getting lost in the DAG 3.0
comment period and the upcoming holiday season. I really do believe
individual BC members should weigh in on this important issue one way or
another.

 

Best regards,

 

Michael

 


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 18, 2009


New gTLD Expressions of Interest: Proceed with Caution
Palage Offers Suggestions to Ensure Useful Insight is Gathered in Process

WASHINGTON D.C. - The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) should look to precedents if it chooses to move forward with
soliciting Expressions of Interests for new Generic Top Level Domains,
states Adjunct Fellow Michael Palage in " <http://ga1.org/ct/-7Xbtas1Mm48/>
New gTLD Expressions of Interest: Proceed with Caution," released today by
The Progress & Freedom Foundation.  Previous EOIs were successful in helping
ICANN gather pertinent data to judge likely gTLD demand and make fact-based
decisions.

In the  <http://ga1.org/ct/-7Xbtas1Mm48/> paper, Palage, a former ICANN
board member, states that the Expression of Interest, if well executed,
could help to address a number of the remaining issues with implementation
of new gTLDs. If executed improperly, however, the initiative will likely
erode confidence in the new gTLD process and negatively impact ICANN's
evaluation in the upcoming reviews under ICANN's new Affirmation of
Commitments.

Palage warns against proposals to make participation in the EOI a condition
for participating in the first new gTLD round.  He also warns against
instituting substantial fees to file, stating that both proposals deviate
from established precedent.  Palage explains that such actions would
transform a fact-based gathering EOI into a "front-running scheme for
insiders to reserve their space at the front of the new gTLD line."  

The proposal would fail to create a level playing field for potential
applicants.  Moreover, this proposed front-running approach would likely
only increase ICANN's litigation risks by appearing to grant a license or
privilege in a process which may ultimately diverge from present
expectations.

"The path forward for ICANN is a road that it has previously traveled - and
one which has served it well," concludes Palage.  "There is little benefit
to deviating from these established precedents to benefit the narrow
interests of a small number of TLD applicants whose business plans have been
jeopardized because of ICANN's decision to listen to the global community by
slowing down and getting things right."

" <http://ga1.org/ct/-7Xbtas1Mm48/> New gTLD Expressions of Interest:
Proceed with Caution" is available on the  <http://www.pff.org/> PFF
website. 

The Progress & Freedom Foundation is a market-oriented think tank that
studies the digital revolution and its implications for public policy. It is
a 501(c)(3) research & educational organization.