RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Consumer Metrics: notes from presentation to GNSO Council, 23-Jun-2012

["Jonathan Robinson" <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Steve.  Timely notes.  I should have volunteered.  Jonathan.

 

From: owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve DelBianco
Sent: 23 June 2012 11:36
To: gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Berry Cobb
Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Consumer Metrics: notes from presentation to
GNSO Council, 23-Jun-2012

 

In Saturday's GNSO Council work session, we spent an hour presenting and
discussing our draft advice.

 

The presentation is attached. 

 

Also attached (and below) are notes for how I described the "Key Issues".
Below that are the questions/comments from Councilors and general audience. 

 

40+ Metrics for Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, & Competition

combination of surveys and stats

someattempt to measure costs; 

not all have targets

None are intended to steer indiv Ry operators or drive policy development

 

User and registrant Surveys for Consumer Trust & Consumer Choice

Combined annual surveys of users and registrants

Assess awareness of new gTLDs in general; and of specific-purpose gTLDs

perceptions about trust, 

experience in finding desired content; 

experience with phishing & malware; 

registrant experience pursuing cybersquatting

 

Consumer Trust - Relative Incidence of UDRP, URS, & Litigation

UDRP+URS complaints and decisions against registrants "relative" to legacy
gTLDs.  E.g. 1000 UDRP+URS decisions against registrants in 1 million
registrations give a relative rate of 0.1 percent or 1 per 1000

Ry Contract breach notices: [significantly] lower than in legacy gTLDs.
1/20 =  5% of registries.   5% of new Registries could be as high as 100
breach notices!

 

Consumer Choice - Defensive & Duplicate Registrations, Redirects

3 potential indicators of registrations done for "defensive" purposes:

sunrise registrations or blocks using TM clearinghouse

redirects (automated 

self-reported duplicate registrations

Collect data from IP organizations on quantities and costs of def
registrations and of pursuing cybersquatting.

Competition - Wholesale and Retail pricing of Domain Registrations

Our proposed Competition metrics include comparing wholesale and retail
prices in new gTLDs open to public vs legacy gTLDs open to general public.
No target, just comparison.

USG is keenly interested in weekly data on revenue and registration
volume,both legacy and new gTLDs.   

Appendix B:  ICANN legal advised us they are concerned about collecting,
comparing, and sharing non-pubic price data.   Also concerned about
potential that price focus could lead to price recommendations.

To address this: WG could recommend that a third party could collect and
analyze the data, sharing only aggregates and stats.

gTLD expansion program Costs and Benefits

USG comments: "benefits of new gTLDs must outweigh costs to consumers and
other market participants"

WG asked the USG reps to reconcile that with what's in the Affirmation.

WG won't attempt to measure all benefits and costs.  Some significant costs
are evaluated, though.  

 

Q&A/Discussion on Council:

JeffNeuman: troubled by timing of 3-yr targets; some targets are
unreasonable too.

Ching Chiao: will these metrics drive registry contract requirements?  (No)

Wendy Seltzer: flag concerns with framing of Consumer Trust; looking
backwards atpast abuses; need to see unexpected benefits of new innovation

MaryWong: recommended the WG add advice to modify the metrics as new
benefits (and new abuses) become evident.  (good idea)

AlanGreenberg: concern with Redirect metric.  Some redirects are beneficial
and not defensive

Zahid Jamil: compliments on progress; ICANN has an obligation here; likes
Flexibility (Mary's idea); how do registrants know which national laws apply
to them and to the Registrar and Registry they're considering?  (described
our choice metric on visibility and clarity)

Jonathan Robinson: Helpful and interesting perspective on new gTLD program.
Troubled with 3-year target, given ramp-up time and gradual delegations

Michael Graham (IPC): Q18 proposed mission and purpose could support
consumer trust

NPOCChair: gave anecdote of World Bank project to define 160 metrics for
poverty reduction projects.   When the WB asked citizens in developing
nations they got 500 metrics for poverty.  Are we asking regular consumers
about our metrics?  (contrasted WB process with ICANN's pub comment process)


JeffNeuman: Closed (single registrant) TLDs may not fit with open gTLDs when
doing many metrics.  (cited the Competition measures where we excluded
closed TLDs; said that trust and choice for internet users would apply to
closed TLDs)

James Bladel: redirects: should get baseline data from legacy gTLDs today
(good idea)

Jeremy Beal: interesting to look at "potential" consumers.  (cited choice
metrics on IDNs, languages, geographic diversity )

Olivier CLB (ALAC): metrics should be seen as trends too.  Look at progress
over time.

Chuck Gomes: this is a good example of M-S model working well.  Compliments.


JeffNeuman: excellent work.   

 

-- 

Steve DelBianco

Executive Director

NetChoice

http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org 

+1.202.420.7482 

 

 

From: Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:04 AM
To: "gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Latest Docs

 

Team,

 

Here are the latest PPT & Advice Letter.  I did not include the Public
Comment Review tool, as it barely changed today.

 

Thank you.  B

 

Berry Cobb

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN)

720.839.5735

mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

@berrycobb