ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

NPOC comments on delay to the GNSO review

  • To: comments-gnso-review-15jul13@xxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: NPOC comments on delay to the GNSO review
  • From: mlemineur@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:16:55 -0500

The Not-for-Profit Operational Constituency (NPOC) submits the following
comments on the potential recommendation by the Board Structural
Improvements Committee (SIC) to postpone the GNSO Review.

The purpose of the NPOC is to represent the concerns of not-for-profit and
non-governmental organizations who have an Internet domain registered. In
order to effectively perform its mission, NPOC (as all other
constituencies) relies on the Generic Name Supporting Organization which
"strives to keep gTLDs operating in a fair, orderly fashion across one
global Internet, while promoting innovation and competition".
<Extracted from: http://gnso.icann.org/en/about>.
We believe the review should not be postponed for the following reasons:

1/ Even if we recognize the current GNSO structure (created as a result of
the previous GNSO review) seemed at the time to be the best adapted model,
NPOC believes the GNSO structure is no longer realistic, rational or
sufficiently responsive to the Internet community needs. Indeed, since
2006 both the context has changed (e.g. ICANN recently announced the
conclusion of the IE phase with 1,745 new gTLDs moving to the next steps
of the new gTLD program) and also, the bicameral structure of the GNSO
results in an unbalanced structure that has not lived up to the
expectations as mentioned by some (please see

2/ As a result of the new gTLD program, it has been reiterated that the
GNSO is expected not only to have new members joining in but also to house
new constituencies. The impact of such influx of new members and
constituencies will undoubtedly change the level of performance and put an
enormous pressure on the existing constituencies. Therefore, a clear
definition on the membership representation of new constituencies and
their rights of audience is required in advance. NPOC strongly feels that
this as well as other key issues, need to be anticipated urgently.

3/ The SIC justifies recommending a delay of the review because of ongoing
processes and activities (namely, the ATRT 2 review as well as the ICANN
strategic planning process). While we do recognize that both these
processes may have implications for the GNSO (as emphasized by the SIC),
this is not an appropriate reason to delay the GNSO review. Indeed, we do
believe that all these processes should be conducted in parallel allowing
cross-structure alignments rather than being approached sequentially. The
effort put into reviews is too high and require a global and overall
perception in keeping with ICANN's multi-stakeholder model, rather than a
walled concept and dispersed distinct impressions.

4/ We must bear in mind that the previous review took years before being
completed and the ATRT 2 work is due to conclude late 2013. Based on such
previous experience, it is likely that several more years will pass by
before this other review is completed.

In conclusion, NPOC believes that the soonest the review starts the better
the results of that review will contribute to ICANNĀ“s efforts to improve
the functioning of the GNSO in adapting to ICANN's anticipated changes and
fulfillment of its mission. Therefore NPOC encourages the SIC and the
Board to avoid further delays in initiating the review process and to take
the necessary actions as mandated within the ICANN Bylaws, Article IV,
Section 4.

Submitted on behalf of NPOC.

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy