RE: [bc-gnso] Draft BC position EOI

["HASSAN Ayesha" <ayesha.hassan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Philip,

Thanks for your efforts to pull this BC input on the EoI together. 

 

Here are a few comments for consideration:

*       Line 8 add "The BC appreciates that the EoI proposal will be discussed 
at the ICANN Nairobi meeting and encourages full consideration of all of the 
comments that have been submitted by individual BC members and the community"
*       Point 4 lines 55-69 suggest consideration of the following revised text 
"The EoI would require applicants to essentially invest blind, thus the ICANN 
Board should not implement any EoI proposal until the essential rules for the 
new gTLD application process are developed and agreed upon by the ICANN 
community. The BC does not believe that it is fair for ICANN to expect 
potential new gTLD applicants to engage in a mandatory EoI process, with 
limited terms by which any investment deposit may be refunded, while the rules 
for applications are not finalized. Key issues in these rules that must be 
finalized should be clearly identified by ICANN with the community, because it 
is not enough for potential applicants to rely on vague guarantees that key 
issues will be tackled and resolved. The current EoI proposal risks 
artificially inflating supply-side interest because it raises fears among many 
of being left behind. In summary, there are important unresolved issues, and 
the mandatory and irreversible model forces applications without sufficient 
understanding of potential future costs, which is not good business practice. 
We urge serious consideration of the impact of proceeding with such an EoI 
proposal given the state of the DAG and the negative consequences on business 
users. "

 

Kind regards,

Ayesha

 

 

 

________________________________

From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Philip Sheppard
Sent: mardi 23 février 2010 10:25
To: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bc-gnso] Draft BC position EOI

 

And with the paper !

 

________________________________

From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@xxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:19 AM
To: 'bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Draft BC position EOI

For 14 day comment

 

I have been asked by the new VP policy coordination Steve DelBianco to act as 
rapporteur for the issue of Expressions of Interest in the context of the new 
gTLDS process.

 

I attach a proposed draft for the Constituency. Its argumentation and 
consequent conclusion is based on the submissions of Bc members in their 
individual capacity to the public comments process. These comment were 
significant in their commonality. In short all commentators believed that:

- the EOI is a poor substitute for data gathering and an economic study

- the EOI is bad business practice as it requires investors to invest in 
ignorance of issues that ICANN is obliged to solve.

 

Comments, improvements are most welcome ideally by e-mail bullet points 
referencing the line numbers rather than Word tracked changes.

This makes the job of the poor rapporteur much easier !

 

 

Philip