Qualified support for IDN gTLD Constituency

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

I am writing to express support for the basic idea behind the proposed IDN gTLD 
constituency. 

IDN advocates, and especially prospective IDN registries, have been one of the 
chief victims of ICANN's inadequate representational structure. The formation 
of this constituency is a welcome sign that this is ending. 

The obstacles to representation were deeply engrained in ICANN's structure. In 
both the GNSO and its predecessor the DNSO, there was simply no place for 
organizations that intended to become registries but were not yet in the root 
as a contracted party with ICANN. And yet, the policies made by the GNSO and 
DNSO directly affect the technical and economic conditions for entry into the 
market for domain name registrations. Thus, prospective IDN registries and 
registrars (as well as other prospective registries) were disenfranchised by 
the GNSO. The idea that only incumbent registries could make the rules for new 
entry into the registry market does not seem fair.

Based on my reading of Sections 3.2 and 11.2.4 of this petition, it appears as 
if this constituency is petitioning for recognition within the Commercial 
Stakeholders Group (CSG). I also conclude this because the CSG will be based on 
a constituency structure, whereas the Noncommercial, Registry and Registrar SGs 
will not be. 

I believe that the CSG is the appropriate location for this constituency. As 
prospective registries, software/service providers and government agencies 
attempting to develop the business of IDN registration, they are analogous to 
the position of ISPs/ connectivity providers. That is, they are service 
providers, some of whom are commercial, while some are nonprofit or state 
owned, but they belong more on the commercial side of the divide than on the 
noncommercial/civil society side. As prospective service providers they will 
have stakes in policies regarding trademark and brand protection similar to 
those of many CSG members. 

There could, however, be room for members in the Noncommercial SG for academics 
and nonprofit researchers involved in IDNs from a non-operational perspective; 
i.e., for cultural, educational or research reasons. The need to break out this 
segment of the group should not, however, impede acceptance of prospective 
domain name services and registry suppliers by the CSG.

Let me take a few moments to respond to some of the negative comments made by 
Philip Sheppard:

1. The "Structural challenge" 
There is no structural challenge, except insofar as noncommercial users of IDNs 
are involved. As suggested above, those stakeholders would be welcome in the 
NCSG. But for the most part, this application comes from prospective suppliers, 
and thus belongs in the CSG. 

2. The "public private challenge"
It is a bit disingenuous for Mr. Sheppard to suggest that the presence of a few 
government agencies somehow disrupts the structure. As he knows, many ccTLDs 
are run by governments but that does not stop them from being represented in 
the ccNSO. Likewise, many telecom connectivity providers and ISPs are 
state-owned, and not only in developing countries. As of June 2008, the German 
government still holds a 15% stake in Deutsche Telekom directly, and another 
17% through a government bank. In countries like China, nearly all major 
enterprises are state-owned. To exclude enterprises from CSG because of state 
ownership might exclude entire countries from representation. 

3. The "policy challenge"
Sheppard argues that a constituency focused on "one policy" aspect of DNS, such 
as IDNs, is somehow illegitimate. I must confess this one made me laugh. For 
ten years now, we have had a trademark constituency despite the fact that 
trademark protection is only one aspect of DNS policy - and moreover, the 
category "trademark owner" is a subset of the category "business" and 
"ISP/connectivity provider." Philip cannot have it both ways. If this IDN 
proposal is illegitimate, so is the existing trademark constituency. If, 
however, trademark owners can look out for their special interests across a 
wide range of DNS issues, so can IDN advocates. IDN will affect Whois issues, 
security issues, trademark issues, as well as new gTLD and registrar policies.