Re: [npoc-voice] Current Problems with the ICANN .geographic TLD process

[Olévié Kouami <olivierkouami@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,
Thank you very much to all for this campaign of awareness and
information about our rights and responsibilities in the governance of
the Internet.
The specific case of .Health awakened us to a certain reality that can
exist even in the management of ccTLDs and its sub-domains as with the
new gTLDs IMHO.
Thank you Sam
Thank you Klaus.
Cheers !
-Olevie-


2014-10-07 12:35 UTC, Sam Lanfranco <lanfran@xxxxxxxx>:
> Dear NPOC members,
>
> The following is a "For Your Information" posting on issues surrounding
> geographic top level domains that are likely to impact on local NGO
> activities (*YOU*) as ICANN's gTLD process continues. The what, where,
> when and how of appropriate policy processes here are very unclear, but
> what is clear is that they will call for greater awareness and
> engagement at all levels, especially by NGOs, Civil Society, and
> national goverments. This is my posting to the NCSG discussion list. -
> Sam Lanfranco, NPOC Policy Committee Chair
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:      Current Problems with the .city TLD process
> To:   NCSG-DISCUSS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> The following was written (by me) for the global health community's
> Health Information for All 2015 (HIFA2015) discussion group. HIFA2015
> had been a venue for vocal criticism of ICANN's handling of the .health
> gTLD. This drops down a notch to the .city TLD initiative and discusses
> a problem tossed up by the creation of .nyc. While the problem is with
> second level domain names, the parties to the problem have views on what
> should constitute a responsible role for ICANN here. The problem is
> complicated,and won't go away. It is another area where ICANN can be
> engaged and show leadership, or watch passively as Internet DNS naming
> policy is developed elsewhere. - Sam L.
>
> *Posting for **HIFA2015@xxxxxxxxxxx*
>
> The global health community has been vocal but, to date, largely
> unsuccessful in its struggle over the .health generic Top Level Domain
> name, now in the hands of a private-for-profit company. There is a
> second problem on the horizon, and it will strike closer to home for
> many organizations in the global health community. It has to do with
> geographic based domain names and second level domain names. For
> example, if .nairobi is a city TLD, health.narobi could be a second
> level domain name, owned by the city or a private company. This can
> create multiple issues for community groups. Here is already unfortunate
> current situation for community mental health groups in New York. The
> application period (so called Landrush) for second level .nyc domain
> names ended last Friday October 3rd. On Saturday one community health
> organization applicant received a notice from the registrar handling its
> application informing it that more than one applicant had requested the
> MentalHealth.nyc domain name, and that the domain name would be sold at
> auction with 60% of revenue going to the private company managing .nyc
> for New York City, and 40% to the city.
>
> The problem here is that unlike the ICANN auctions there is no
> transparency with regard to who the various applicants are. As a second
> level domain issue ICANN has washed it hands of such issues. In the
> direct ICANN auctions the various applicants are known and can negotiate
> to avoid an auction or collaborate on bidding. None of that is possible
> here. The community health group in question is advocating for
> transparency as a basis for a collaborative dialogue around
> MentalHealth.nyc. If another party has a superior plan this community
> group would be prepared to withdraw its application. With a blind
> auction nobody has an idea of who the other bidders are. This
> organization is a half century old not-for-profit serving a small
> section of the city. Perhaps the others applicants do similar work. This
> community group is asking for some assurance of transparency for
> applicants at this second level, wishfully here, and certainly in any
> new gTLD efforts. It suggests that this should be part of an ICANN
> contract language driven Informed Consent process. This also raises an
> issue of what should be the role of local governments in setting the
> rules of the game for handling second level geographic TLD issues.
>
> The further worry is that there is the possibility that the
> MentalHealth.nyc name could be sought by a comedy club, or maybe to
> market a magic health produce. While recognizing both of these might
> qualify as beneficial to mental health, the applicant argues that from a
> city perspective the more traditional health use of the name would be
> more appropriate. For this reason, they would like to see the ICANN
> Informed Consent provisions provide for greater transparency and
> multistakeholder engagement in selecting public interest name set-asides
> at the the .city and related geoTLD levels. If as a last resort an
> auction is necessary, they feel that the proceeds should be retained
> within the community and not siphoned off by the gTLD gate keepers. This
> is how the ICANN private auctions work where the proceeds of the auction
> are shared by the losing bidders.
>
> What can global community health community people do here? First, they
> can press both ICANN and their respective national government
> representatives to ICANN's Government Advisory Council (GAC) for more
> appropriate second level provisions in the Informed Consent language of
> ICANN contracts. Second, they can watch efforts at local .city TLD and
> other geographic gTLDs in their home territories and engage their
> governments and the applicants early in the process. This will not be
> easy but it is just another "rules of the game" challenge flowing from
> the pandora's box of the Internet ecosystem.
>
> Sam Lanfranco, Chair
> ICANN/NPOC Policy Committee
>
>
>


-- 
Olévié Ayaovi Agbenyo KOUAMI
Directeur Général de GiDa-OKtetS (Représentations commerciales et négoces)
Directeur Exécutif et CEO de l'INTIC4DEV (Institut des TIC pour le
développement)
SG de ESTETIC  - Association Togolaise des professionnels des TIC (
http://www.estetic.tg)
ICANN-NPOC Communications Committee Chair (http://www.icann.org/ et
http://www.npoc.org/)
Membre du FOSSFA (www.fossfa.net) et Membre de de Internet Society (
www.isoc.org)
BP : 851 - Tél.: (228) 90 98 86 50 / (228) 98 43 27 72
Skype : olevie1 FB : @olivier.kouami.3 Twitter : #oleviek Lomé - Togo