<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-gtld-dt] Kick-Off: Call for input on: "Impact of new gTLDs on ICANN's structure"
- To: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-gtld-dt] Kick-Off: Call for input on: "Impact of new gTLDs on ICANN's structure"
- From: Thomas Rickert <rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:44:11 +0200
Jeff,
thanks for your response.
My understanding is that Bertrand would like everyone to present their ideas /
views on ICANN as a whole. It is certainly up to the Council to focus on
certain aspects.
Just to be clear, I was not suggesting in any way that the individual groups do
not have a resilient structure, but gathering facts on what the challenges are
is - in my view - imperative to start an informed discussion. Even assuming the
individual groups can handle the challenges, where should new players entering
the scene find their home, e.g. a big brand applicant running a registry and
its own registrar.
I am more than happy for you to propose a different approach, but I think that
we should structure our discussion a bit. You may also wish to provide input on
the aspects that you deem appropriate for us to handle and we take that as a
basis.
Best,
Thomas
Am 15.08.2012 um 05:37 schrieb Neuman, Jeff:
> Thomas,
>
> Thanks for kicking this off. As you know, the registries stakeholder group
> has been considering the challenges for several years now and believes that
> it has adequately addressed the challenges (at least as much as we can) in
> advance of any TLDs being awarded. We also believe it is a resilient
> structure that will stand the challenges presented for the next several years.
>
> I actually do not believe the path you want us to head down is the
> appropriate path. We, as a council, should not be focusing on whether the
> RySG (or even the RrSG) is able to handle the challenges, but rather whether
> we as a council (and as a community) can handle the changes ahead. The inner
> workings of any particular stakeholder group or constituency should be
> handled by that particular stakeholder group or constituency. Comments can
> be provided on proposed structures by any other group, but in the end, the
> position previously taken by the Commercial Stakeholder Group and the
> Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (and their respective constituencies) is
> that the inner workings of those groups are between them and the ICANN Board
> (who gets input by the community). We expect that the precedent set in the
> last few years on this be followed through this exercise.
>
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
>
>
> From: owner-gnso-gtld-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-gtld-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Thomas Rickert
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 3:37 AM
> To: Gnso-gtld-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-gtld-dt] Kick-Off: Call for input on: "Impact of new gTLDs on
> ICANN's structure"
>
> Dear colleagues,
> welcome to this mailing list and thank you for your willingness to contribute
> to this important topic.
>
> I have copied Bertrand's original message at the end of this e-mail for your
> reference.
>
> Let me propose to take an approach consisting of two phases.
>
> In the first phase, I would like the group to establish some facts and in the
> second phase we should draw conclusions from this. The reason for that is
> that I am convinced that we need to write down and consider the wishes and
> expectations which the existing and new players may have before rushing into
> a debate about potentially changing an exisisting structure.
>
> Phase one:
>
> - Qualitative challenges
> - Quantitative challenges
>
> Phase two:
>
> What is the impact of the above factors on the ICANN structure, if any?
>
>
> To give you an idea of what we might consider, here come some questions /
> examples:
>
> Phase one:
>
> Qualitative challenges:
>
> - What are the interests of new registries? Are they different from those of
> existing registries? In what way are they different?
> - Will the interests of registrars change, will distribution channels change?
> - Will there be enough representation of the community with the given
> structure?
> ...
>
> Quantitative challenges:
>
> - There will be a bigger community with more attendees at meetings.
> - Will ICANN be able to provide a good service to the bigger community with
> existing staff?
> ...
>
> In Phase two, we will then assess the identified challenges/expectations and
> see whether these can be met/responded to with the given structure. If not,
> we will hopefully be able to make some suggestions how they can be addressed
> adequately.
>
> I would like to invite you to provide input to the aspects of phase one for
> the time being as I think we should first find out what the challenges could
> be before we discuss potential consequences or actions that should be taken
> by ICANN. Certainly, you are invited to respond addressing phase two as well,
> if you wish.
>
> Would you please send your initial input by August 20th? I will then analyze
> it and send out the request for input for phase 2.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
> Thomas
>
> Dear all,
>
> The new gTLD program will have a significant impact on the functioning of
> ICANN and its structure. An in-depth community discussion is needed to
> identify early the corresponding challenges and possible evolutions. It
> should be conducted while the gTLD program itself is being implemented,
> without waiting for the completion of this round. This should in particular
> be taken into account in the upcoming gNSO review, planned in 2013.
>
> As you probably remember, this issue was therefore put on the agenda of the
> various Board interactions with SOs, ACs and constituencies during the Prague
> meeting. Several issues were identified during these discussions, pertaining
> both to scalability factors (due to the number of applications) and
> qualitative impact (including the diversity of the new gTLDs and the
> potential overlapping of the constituencies they could belong to).
>
> At the end of each such session, Steve Crocker invited participants to share
> a one-pager on this topic to gather preliminary views and help prepare a
> dedicated session in Toronto.
>
> I am writing to you as Chairs of the respective SOs, ACs, Stakeholder Groups
> or Constituencies to renew this call for input. The Board Structural
> Improvements Committee (SIC), chaired by Ray Plzak, will discuss the topic
> during the Board Workshop mid-September and your perspective is eagerly
> sought after. The contributions can be very synthetic at that stage, for
> instance merely listing bullet points of identified potential impacts. The
> objective is to get as complete a picture as possible of the different
> dimensions of the issue.
>
> I know the summer period is not the easiest to gather views in you respective
> groups but I also understand that this has already been discussed before
> Prague and you probably are in a position to share the concerns already
> identified, if not the possible solutions. This is only a preliminary stage
> and further consultations will take place to prepare the Toronto session.
>
> Thank you in advance for your contribution, if possible before September 10,
> and don't hesitate to share this call for input with people I might have
> inadvertently overlooked or you think might be good contributors from your
> group.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Thomas Rickert, Attorney at Law
>
> Managing Partner, Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH
> www.anwaelte.de
>
> Director Names & Numbers, eco Association of the German Internet Industry
> www.eco.de
>
___________________________________________________________
Thomas Rickert, Rechtsanwalt
Schollmeyer & Rickert Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft m.b.H. (i.e. law firm)
Geschäftsführer / CEO: Torsten Schollmeyer, Thomas Rickert
HRB 9262, AG Bonn
Büro / Office Bonn:
Kaiserplatz 7-9, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 0
Büro / Office Frankfurt a.M.:
Savignystraße 43, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)69 714 021 - 56
Zentralfax: +49 (0)228 74 898 - 66
mailto: rickert@xxxxxxxxxxx
skype-id: trickert
web: www.anwaelte.de
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|