Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Prioritization

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/6/10 2:05 PM, Richard Tindal wrote:
> To add a nuance to Rafik's comment on /'entrepreneurs in those too
> tight markets'/

We have:
o communities applying in their own behalf in (a),
o non-governmental, civil society and non-profit entities applying, 
either on behalf of a service community, as in a, above, or on behalf 
of their organic interest,
o applicants characterized only by their location, and not necessarily 
the market they are proposing to create or enter,
o applicants for languages whose presence on the web is limited, and 
at present Arabic accounts for 0.3% of the overall content available 
on the internet while Arabic speakers represent 7% of the total world 
population [1],
o entrepreneurs, with the "too tight" condition.

> The logical implication of the existing language is that not only is
> the entrepreneur from the tight market but that also *the proposed TLD
> is focused on that market.*

I think the implication is that applications for communities, for 
civil society, for locales in emerging markets/developing countries 
and for languages are not limited to the communities themselves, to 
NGOs, to specific locations, and to language development interests, 
but they may also be made, in the absence of any of the above, by 
entrepreneurs.

> If we retain this type of applicant as worthy of support (and I
> understand Rafik is proposing that we don't) I think we should clarify
> that the TLD, also, is focused on the '/too tight market"/. If we
> don't make that clarification the recommendation wont make logical sense.

I understand that to be Rafik's view also. My candidate for Principal 
Chief of the Cherokee Nation in the 2005 race just got to Santiago, 
Chile, and a mutual friend asked if she could take a side-trip to 
Easter Island (where there is a real problem between Chile and the 
indigenous population of Rapa Nui). I'll use this as an example.
Easter Island is a pretty tight market. Suppose an entrepreneur living 
in Hanga Roa wants to compete with Verisign in the Polynesian market. 
Do we leave this market by default to Verisign or an application by 
AusRegistry because the offer to compete (from an entrepreneur in 
Hanga Roa) was for something not a "too tight market"?
Obviously I disagree with Rafik, since we need not limit service to 
only those Communities, Organizations, locales and languages which are 
capable themselves, in 2011, of putting forth an application under 
ICANN's terms and conditions. We know that the American Red Cross, 
which is on the high end of NGOs with funds, isn't ready to apply in 
their own right, by themselves, and operate any resulting delegation. 
This will go to an "entrepreneur", leaving the ARC holding only a 
contract and no core competencies [2], and this will be repeated 
around the world.
We can allow service to be started by entrepreneurs, and their 
markets, the communities, NGOs, regional users and language 
communities, will influence them as their use of the DNS develops.
Need is not created, or negated, by the legal form of the applicant.

Eric

[1] source: King Abdullah Initiative for the Arabic Content at 
www.econtent.org.sa.
[2] yes, that is a double entendre.