Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Consumer Metrics: notes from presentation to GNSO Council, 23-Jun-2012
- To: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Consumer Metrics: notes from presentation to GNSO Council, 23-Jun-2012
- From: Rosemary Sinclair <rosemary.sinclair@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:01:33 +0000
Issue re Costs and Benefits
USG focused on Economic costs and benefits...looking for overall net increase
in social welfare for whole community. Key factor here is timeframe used and
inclusion of "externalities" when assessing costs and benefits
GNSO councillors (some of) focused on ACCOUNTING type costs and
benefits...price of gTLD, price of registration, cost to defend trademark etc.
This is a different analysis and much shorter term, not using discount rates etc
Just for sake of completeness there are other perspectives thru which to do
Cost Benefit Analysis eg
Tax perspective on costs
Regulator perspective for rate setiing
Annual Report perspective ...think Enron, think Glkbal Crossing...think ratings
I have re-read Econ Fwk doc in last couple of days
We should stay away from this playing field .....look fwd to more chatter on
Director, External Relations
Australian School of Business
+61 413 734490
On 23/06/2012, at 7:38 PM, "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
> 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
> 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
> 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
> 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
> http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
> From: Berry Cobb <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:04 AM
> To: "gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-consumercci-dt@xxxxxxxxx>"
> Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] Latest Docs
> 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)
> <GNSO CCTC Presentation Prague 2012.ppt>
> <Notes from Metrics presentation to GNSO Council.docx>