Individual Users Constituency Statement

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Individual Users Constituency Statement:

We the undersigned long-time participants in ICANN's
generic domain name policy development process have
chosen to address the Board on behalf of the as yet
unrecognized constituency of individual Internet users
in order to facilitate the Board's understanding of
the proposed settlement's effects on our unrepresented
stakeholder community. We look forward to assisting
the Board in arriving at the irrefutable determination
that the proposed settlement agreement with VeriSign
fails to serve the best interests of our community, of
ICANN, and of the Internet community as a whole, and
must be rejected in its totality. Our actionable
comments appear within each consideration.


The settlement's effect on the Internet's individual
users:

1. As we look at the issues emerging from the WSIS
discussions, we note a predominant concern that has
been expressed regarding the pre-eminence of a single
nation in Internet matters. We see that the bulk of
the revenues within the Domain Name System flow from
the rest of the world to the coffers of U.S.-based
sponsoring organizations: VeriSign (.com and .net),
Public Interest Registry (.org), NeuLevel, Inc.
(.biz), Registry Services Corporation (.pro),
Tralliance Corporation (.travel), DotCooperation LLC
(.coop), Afilias, Ltd. (.info), Employ Media LLC
(.jobs). The proposed settlement agreement, by
retaining presumptive renewal provisions, does not
serve to counter this trend; instead, the agreement
serves to solidify a U.S. stranglehold on registry
services to the detriment of the international
community of Internet users that might well derive
better benefits (both financial and innovative) from a
more internationalized approach. We accordingly ask
the ICANN Board to better allow for further
internationalization of the gTLD registry community by
creating the opportunities that will invariably result
from setting aside presumptive renewal language in
registry contracts in favor of competitive re-bid
provisions.

2. The Internet's individual users benefit from
investments that increase registry efficiency and
stability. We support the $200,000,000 commitment that
VeriSign made to registry infrastructure improvements
(documented in Appendix W to the prior .com
agreement), as a measure that would serve the needs of
our community. The proposed settlement allows VeriSign
to contractually walk away from this research and
development commitment to the detriment of our
community. We accordingly ask the ICANN Board to not
accept the proposed settlement so that VeriSign will
remain obligated under the terms of the 2001 .com
contract to perform this service. We further ask the
ICANN Board to publish VeriSign's annual reports on
this $200,000,000 research and development activity.

3. As a community, Internet users are invariably
affected by policies that are implemented without the
benefit of consensus-based decision-making. We are
highly concerned about the probity of Staff
negotiations with VeriSign that resulted in such an
unacceptable settlement agreement (especially in view
of the fact that settlement negotiations were
transpiring as a backdrop to the recent .net
negotiations), and we worry that private bargaining on
the part of ICANN Staff has supplanted the policy
formulating mission of ICANN's Supporting
Organizations. As individual users still retain some
rights within the ICANN process, specifically the
right to comment and the right to be called upon by a
Task Force within a Supporting Organization Policy
Development Process, we view it as a necessary defense
of our rights to insist that when unresolved policy
matters arise in the course of contract negotiations,
that the ICANN Board direct the appropriate Supporting
Organization to come to a policy determination prior
to having Staff exercise their own judgment on such
policy matters.

4. The Internet's individual users appreciate the fact
that ICANN's Articles of Incorporation contain a
clause that states: "No substantial part of the
activities of the Corporation shall be the carrying on
of propaganda." We view the systematic propagation of
doctrines or causes on the part of the Domain Name
System's steward as not an appropriate action. The
settlement provisions that bind VeriSign to a
cheerleading role in support of ICANN are therefore
regarded by our community as an act that chills free
speech and as a material breach of ICANN's Articles of
Incorporation. As a mindset that allows for
impediments to free speech affects everyone in ICANN's
ambit, we accordingly ask the ICANN Board to dispense
with any settlement language that would curtail free
and unimpeded discussion. We believe that all Internet
users, including registry operators, have the right to
come to their own conclusion as to whether ICANN is
the appropriate technical coordination body for the
DNS, and that they have the right to advocate such
views without restriction. We further ask the ICANN
Board to eliminate from its bylaws all language which
preconditions involvement in certain ICANN bodies
based upon "commitment to the success of ICANN" - such
loyalty oaths are at odds with the evolution of
Internet governance which may indeed determine that
other institutions or models may better serve the
future needs of the Internet community.

5. Individual internet users have long been worried
about the prospect of registry or registrar failure
and the potential impact of service disruptions on our
community. As we do not see a registry failover
program in place that would allow for continuity of
service provisioning in the event of a material breach
by a registry, we accordingly ask the ICANN Board to
establish a registry failover program. Additionally,
as we recognize the value of a compliance program
(supervised by compliance officers) that comports with
the compliance initiative detailed in ICANN's 7
October 2005 Status Report to the U.S. Department of
Commerce, we ask the ICANN Board to ensure that any
settlement with VeriSign retains and augments the
Sanctions program outlined in Appendix Y to the prior
.com agreement.

6. A constant refrain in global discussions among the
worldwide community of internet users has been the
ongoing need for increased competition, freedom of
choice and affordability. We Internet users do not
deem it appropriate for ICANN and VeriSign to be
settling their contractual dispute by colluding in a
course of action that serves to take even more money
out of our pockets in perpetuity - this does not make
the Internet more affordable to those that would seek
the benefits that domain name registration has to
offer. Accordingly, we ask the ICANN Board to
establish a policy with respect to registry price caps
prior to entering into any settlement with VeriSign. 

7. Individual users of the Internet recognize that the
ICANN Board is exercising prudence in requiring
periodic reviews of its structures and operations. We
appreciate the ongoing review of domain name
portability issues that is proceeding within the GNSO,
acknowledging that changes in policy should be made as
needed based on community experience. We therefore
take issue with the language in the proposed .com
agreement that places a three-year limitation on the
possibility of modifying the proposed procedure that
governs the introduction of new registry services.
This is short-sighted and ill considered. Accordingly,
we ask the ICANN Board to set aside the three year
limitation on procedure-modification specified in the
new .com agreement. 

8. Individual Internet users understand that the new
.com agreement triples ICANN's per-domain fee which
has the effect of tripling ICANN's revenue. We are
deeply troubled by the ongoing exclusion of individual
users from ICANN's Budget Advisory Group, and by the
lack of checks-and-balances which would serve to
restrain abuses attendant with the uncontrolled
exercise of ICANN's power of the purse. The very
people who will face the burden of increased
expenditure on domainnames are the individual
registrants and internet users who seem to have had
such a marginalised part in these contract
negotiations. In the sense that increases in prices of
domain names impact on the user community, it seems to
us that they deserve much more representation,
including their own constituency within the GNSO.
There appears to have been wholly inadequate
consultation with the very people who will be effected
most by Verisign's
unrestricted right to raise prices year on year. It
would have been preferable, in a bidding process, to
place much more emphasis on those applicants who
planned to *reduce* prices, not *raise* them.  We
accordingly ask the ICANN Board to condition approval
of per-domain fees on the unanimous consent of its
constituent bodies which shall include a constituency
for individual users.

9. We believe that it is proper for the courts to
determine whether VeriSign's attempts to introduce
Internationalized Domain Names, Consolidate, Waiting
List Service and Sitefinder were breaches of the
current .com agreement. We believe that ICANN has an
obligation to manage a key supplier in the interest of
the community they serve by continuing on the path to
judicial resolution of the issues. While we understand
that significant ICANN funds, staff and community
resources have been devoted to the ICANN-VeriSign
litigation, we approve of such expenditures. We
accordingly ask the ICANN Board not to settle with
VeriSign, to establish a litigation fund specific to
the lawsuit (even at the expense of many other
significant ICANN priorities), and to allow the court
system to arrive at its own final determination.

10. The Internet's individual users are not
third-party beneficiaries to any contract between
ICANN and VeriSign; as such, we rely on ICANN to serve
as a trustee for the broader community. We believe
that a responsible trustee would recognize that the
proposed incremental price increases, when not coupled
with either demonstrated need or enhanced registry
service offerings, constitute a disservice to the
community at large. 

We have recently taken note of a better process for
the introduction of price increases within the .us
namespace that might serve as a guide to the ICANN
Board, and we accordingly ask the ICANN Board to
develop a policy to govern registry price increase
considerations that would be tied to service
enhancements. The proposed price increases in the .us
namespace have been accompanied by the promise of new
scheduled registry services which make the proposed
price increases a palatable proposition; .us price
increases ($0.50) are accompanied by:

a. Development of services for certain public resource
second level domains (engagement of business partners
to build enhanced uses for these names by Dec. 1,2005,
and launch of first second level domain and related
services by May 15, 2006).

b. Development of a .us-specific directory search
engine (partnership with an established provider of
directory services and search engine services by Jan.
15, 2006, and launch of searching capability by June
15, 2006).

c. Development of a secure platform for e-government
initiatives that would allow citizens to communicate
and to interact with the U.S. government in a direct
and safe forum (continued discussions with the
Internet Engineering and Planning Group and the DNSSEC
Deployment Group, with initiation of next DNSSEC trial
by March 15, 2006, and targeted launch of platform, by
September 15, 2006).

At a time when many continue to question ICANN's
legitimacy, we would regard it as folly for ICANN to
act in opposition to the will of the broader user
community by sanctioning unwarranted price increases -
this would certainly not be in ICANN's best interest,
and would only result in ever-increasing acrimony. We
ask the ICANN Board examine the root cause of the
severe disconnect between the position of its
negotiating team and the position of the balance of
the Internet community -- clearly there is something
seriously amiss within the context of ICANN
decision-making processes. 


19 November, 2005


Respectfully submitted by:


Danny Younger
Richard Henderson
Joop Teernstra
Sotiris Sotiropoulos
Abel Wisman
Abraham Christiaan van Heerden
Andrew Moulden
chris mcelroy
Chris Willoughby
Chuck Crawford
Daniel R Shoop
Darryl (Dassa) Lynch
Dinesh Nair
Domingo Barón
Don Brown
Dora Gerber
DR MICHAEL GENDRON
DVB Rao
Eric Dierker
Forrester D. Rupp
James Khan - Sonoma California USA
Jay Levine
Joanna Lane
John Noerrer
Karl-Josef Ziegler
Ken W Sinclair
Khaled KOUBAA
Marco Toledo de Assis Bastos
Marko Kovacic
Max Wagener
Miles Nordin
NARUSE, Yui
Navin Jarugumilli
Othmar Krapf
Oussama MISKIN
Paustinus Siburian
Rodrigo Severo
Ronald Tiefenthäler
Roozbeh Pournader
s.maniam
Samuel Sotillo
Sanjeev Goyal
Thomas Wiesinger
Tony Farrow
Torsten Stenneken




                
__________________________________________ 
Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about. 
Just $16.99/mo. or less. 
dsl.yahoo.com