[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] ALAC statement on the GAC scorecard

[Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello JASsers

I will try to make it to the conference call in 10 hoiurs, but it will be
difficult as I have a doctor appointment.

Whether or not I can make it, I want to make the JAS group aware of the ALAC
Statement on the GAC Scorecard, which was released this evening. The
statement -- which is still subject to ALAC endorsement -- has been sent to
the GAC and the ICANN Board at their requests.

Of specific interest to this group is the ALAC response to GAC Scorecard
Item 10, which refers to the JAS issue:

> *Regarding applicants from developing economies requiring relief (#10):The 
> ALAC has long been of firm belief that ICANN should offer a beneficial
> pricing to applicants who meet rigid criteria regarding location, local
> ownership, community service and financial need. We continue to charter and
> encourage the "JAS" working group to explore ways to reduce barriers within
> the ICANN application framework, and advocate cost reduction for eligible
> applicants. The effort of ICANN to empower applications from all parts of
> the world must not be one of charity; it must not pit applicants against
> each other to demonstrate who is most "worthy" for a limited pool of subsidy
> funds. ICANN staff's refusal to even discuss the concept of differential
> pricing, reflecting an inappropriate philosophical approach to the issue,
> has seriously impeded efforts to research potential areas of cost saving
> within the current application framework. And while the Board response to
> (#10) is to await the final work of the JAS, we note that it has already
> explicitly rejected early JAS appeals for lowered pricing at the Trondheim
> meeting. We are certain this posture is inimical to the global public
> interest for an Internet ecology that is representative of the peoples of
> the world, and we strongly endorse the GAC's effort to request the ICANN
> Board to reconsider this regressive and anti-competitive position. We also
> encourage ongoing monitoring of the costs to administer the gTLD program to
> determine where price reductions may be enabled for these applicants while
> maintaining general principles of overall cost-recovery*
>

- Evan