Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] suggestions gathered in Dakar

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>]

Hello all,

actually, the original schedule showed a call last Tuesday UTC (1st
Nov), which I gather was cancelled since it was too close after the
meeting, and the next call being scheduled for the 15th Nov. Works for me.
Kind regards,

Olivier

On 08/11/2011 04:33, Rosemary Sinclair wrote :
> Hi Steve
>
> Would 15th be ok? I have awful week of travels this week
>
> Tks for transcript....will be good to hear from you, Cheryl and others re 
> feedback
>
> Cheers, Rosemary
>
> Rosemary Sinclair
> Director, External Relations
> Australian School of Business
> UNSW
> +61 413 734490
>
> On 08/11/2011, at 1:20 PM, "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hello, all.   Are we having our regular call this week?
>>
>> Here are transcripts and notes from Dakar discussions of our Consumer Trust 
>> working group.
>> Attached is the transcript from a brief discussion at GNSO Working session 
>> on Sat 22-Oct.
>> Also attached are the slides we presented in Dakar on Saturday and Wednesday.
>> Below are my notes from the working session on Wednesday.
>> At bottom is the note I sent to the US GAC representative Suzanne Radell.  
>> (no reply received yet)
>>
>> The Consumer Trust working group held an open meeting on Wednesday 26-Oct in 
>> Dakar.   We went thru the slides in 15 minutes, then opened to discussion 
>> for 45 minutes.  Several attendees complimented the WG on our progress.  
>> Some notable suggestions:
>>
>> Carlos Aguirre:  Competition and Choice are inter-related.  He's offering 
>> this clarification we could add to both definitions:
>> Competition is closely related to the idea of consumer choice.  In fact, 
>> competition and consumer choice can be seen as two parts of the same whole, 
>> since both touch both providers and consumers of service.  All stakeholders 
>> have an interest in providing choice and in avoiding monopoly in order to 
>> create an open and informed market for all participants.
>>
>> Andy Mack, AM Global:   May need to move quickly to fit this work into the 
>> process of attracting gTLD applications that will achieve these metrics.  
>> That is, if we are going to measure the new gTLD program partly on diversity 
>> of scripts and languages, then shouldn't the Applicant Support Program be 
>> adjusted to attract more IDN scripts?
>>
>> Jeff Brueggeman, ATT:
>> "On slide 11, in addition to market shares I would examine prices, both 
>> retail and wholesale, for the new and existing TLDs.  Retail for obvious 
>> reasons, to see If the prices are high because the new TLD has some market 
>> power (see .xxx) or low because it doesn’t (see .net) and to see what 
>> happens to .com.  Wholesale prices are interesting to the extent that 
>> competition forces even the regulated prices such as .com to fall or not."
>>
>> ATT: "you may wish to amend the proposed definition of consumer, which now 
>> is internet users and registrants.  The issue is that complaints about 
>> defensive registrations do not always result from a registrant, but rather 
>> from being a trademark owner.  Perhaps the definition can be tweaked to 
>> include them."
>>
>> ATT: "under Choice, it may be worth adding in something about innovations, 
>> beyond just the number of TLDs.  For instance, regardless of what one thinks 
>> about .xxx they are talking about screening registrants  in order to 
>> increase credit card acceptance (for some strange reason banks are reluctant 
>> to accept most adult websites today)"
>>
>> Wendy Seltzer:  we are not being normative in this work.   We are attempting 
>> to be descriptive of what could be measured, in terms of competition, choice 
>> and trust.
>>
>> Dave Cohen: asked if this work will "solve the alternate root problem."   
>> DelBianco replied that new TLD metrics could be measured for non-ICANN 
>> roots, but any achievements there would not be directly attributable to 
>> ICANN's new gLTD program.
>>
>> Annelisa Roger: for Choice we should also measure the geographic diversity 
>> of REGISTRANTS in these new TLDs.
>>
>> Berry Cobb:  suggested we measure whether any new gTLDs are blocked in any 
>> countries.
>>
>> Olivier Crepin Leblond:  ALAC will discuss a charter and will attempt to 
>> keep it similar to GNSO Charter.
>>
>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr:  let's do a public comment period on our draft Advice -- 
>>  before sending the the AC/Sos
>>
>> Steve thanked Rosemary Sinclair, ICANN staff, and other WG members in the 
>> room.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Steve DelBianco 
>> <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:14:30 +0000
>> To: Nathalie Peregrine 
>> <nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nathalie.peregrine@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
>> "gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>" 
>> <gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>>
>> Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] CCI questions raised in Monday's session on 
>> Accountability and Transparency forum
>>
>> We got the chance to mention our work to GAC and Board members this morning 
>> at the Accountability & Transparency Forum 
>> <http://dakar42.icann.org/node/26849> here in Dakar.  I brought it up when 
>> the panel discussed improvements in GAC – Board interactions on "Advice".
>>
>> The transcript's not available yet.  Below is a note I sent to US GAC Rep 
>> Suzanne Radell when she asked me to follow-up with her and clarify my 
>> questions regarding the GAC.
>>
>> Rosemary — did Stefane send your draft letter to invite GAC participation?
>>
>> --Steve
>>
>> From: Steve DelBianco 
>> <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:59:12 -0400
>> To: Suzanne Radell <SRadell@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:SRadell@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> Subject: my confusing question at Monday's ATRT session
>>
>> Suzanne -- I used an example to assess whether the ATRT improvements are 
>> actually improving communication with the GAC about advice sought.
>>
>> The example I used was Bruce Tonkin's resolution from Cartagena:
>>
>> Whereas, ICANN has committed to promoting competition, consumer trust and 
>> consumer choice in the Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>> Whereas, if and when new gTLDs (whether in ASCII or other language character 
>> sets) have been in operation for one year, ICANN has committed to organize a 
>> review that will examine the extent to which the introduction or expansion 
>> of gTLDs has promoted competition, consumer trust and consumer choice.
>>
>> Resolved (2010.12.10.30), the ICANN Board requests advice from the ALAC, 
>> GAC, GNSO and ccNSO on establishing the definition, measures, and three year 
>> targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer 
>> choice in the context of the domain name system, such advice to be provided 
>> for discussion at the ICANN International Public meeting in San Francisco 
>> from 13-18 March 2011. Resolved, the ICANN Board requests advice from the 
>> ALAC, GAC, GNSO and ccNSO on establishing the definition, measures, and 
>> three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and 
>> consumer choice in the context of the domain name system.
>>
>>
>> I'm in the cross-community 
>> WG<https://community.icann.org/display/CMG/3.++WG+Charter> developing 
>> definitions and metrics for GNSO, ccNSO and ALAC.   We've made real 
>> progress, as seen in the attached powerpoint and these draft definitions 
>> (red text should be of particular interest to GAC):
>>
>> Consumer Trust refers to the confidence registrants and users can have in 
>> the consistency of name resolution (from
>> registrar to registry), and the degree of confidence among registrants and 
>> users that a TLD registry operator is fulfilling its proposed purpose and is 
>> complying with ICANN policies and applicable national laws.
>>
>> Competition is evident in the quantity and diversity of gTLDs,TLD registry 
>> operators, and registrars.
>>
>> Consumer Choice is evident in the range of options available to registrants 
>> and users for domain scripts and languages, and for TLDs that offer choices 
>> as to the proposed purpose and integrity of their domain name registrants.
>>
>>
>> 1. My first question today was to ask Bruce if the Board ever formally 
>> requested the GAC to provide this advice.  Or, did he assume the GAC was 
>> reading and parsing every Board resolution for these kinds of things?
>>
>> Bruce didn't know, but he suspects the board did not make a formal request.
>>
>> 2. My second question was asking Manal if the GAC was developing advice for 
>> this topic.
>>
>> Naturally, we'd love to have GAC participate in the joint working group, but 
>> we understand that's unlikely.    But we do want to be sure the GAC sees our 
>> work and invite your comments.  We're presenting our work on 
>> Wednesday<http://dakar42.icann.org/node/26965> at 1pm if you can drop by.
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>>
>> --
>> Steve DelBianco
>> Executive Director
>> NetChoice
>> http://www.NetChoice.org<http://www.NetChoice.org/> and 
>> http://blog.netchoice.org<http://blog.netchoice.org/>
>> +1.202.420.7482
>>
>> <Dakar 10-22-2011 Transcript- Consumer Metrics.pdf>
>> <cci presentation Dakar oct 2011v2.ppt>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html