<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Times;
panose-1:2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-NZ link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks Alain – FYI, I am about to post a summary of discussion so far. I understand competing work priorities. Inputs from Lori would be great, but I hope that NPOC members do not feel they need to have an agreed “position” before providing input – this is an open dialogue to which all NCSG members are free to contribute.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Joy<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Alain Berranger<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 21 December 2011 4:12 a.m.<br><b>To:</b> NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: NCSG Principles-- [economic] nature of names : Public Goods<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Joy, Nicolas,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>...very necessary policy work, I would say... I will hopefully have some minor contributions to make in the future but will first refer you to Lori Schulman, the new interim NPOC EC Policy Committee Chair, as she may wish to engage with you and NCSG on this. Remember that we are a new constituency and as such have not yet completed a number of consultations with our currently NCSG-approved membership on policy issues and future members awaiting admission... Our priority is to deal first with our constituency issues.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Alain<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Nicolas Adam <<a href="mailto:nickolas.adam@gmail.com" target="_blank">nickolas.adam@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>First principle I would like to submit goes to the nature of the resources that we deal with here, domain names. <br><br>To address what is the nature of those resources, for us, is to fundamentally segregate the analogies that are and aren't "on point", when it comes to policy proposals.<br><br>I suggest we address this nature on a few ontological axis. I will start with the economic axis.<br><br>############<br><br>I submit that we should fundamentally recognise that domain names are *public goods* because they are both non-rivalrous and non-excludable. Especially in the context of exploding gTLDs, this has never been truer. Might even be amongst the purest examples of such. <br><br>As i've said in a previous post, with limitless alphanumeric strings available, even if one market participant in a sector (i.e. healthy food, or religion) obtains the obvious gTLD (.religion or .healthyfood), there is many other ways to refer to those ideas for their competitors (.faith or .healthybody, etc...) and so they are truly non-rivalrous. <br><br>[note that that is less so in the context of just a few TLDs (hence my liking of the expansion). I would perhaps debate that they already are under existing TLDs, or that the difference from the purest form is a matter of degree and not nature]<br><br>So, this *public good* nature of domain names would be its fundamental economic *nature*. That is *what* they are, economically. <br><br>We can debate this. Anticipated policy implications are welcome. <br><br>If we all agree, we can start writing a "Whereas .... domain names are public goods", but we should really work on completing a list first, and then go on the "Whereas ..."<br><br>######<br><br>Just to give examples of where this would lead, as a general scheme: <br><br>amongst the other ontological axis that I envision we should address and craft a fundamental something on, the [technical] nature of names (addresses), the [expressive] nature of names (free speech?) come to mind.<br><br>We might also want to address the *nature* of the DNS-root zone (common good ?), the *nature* of users (and their centrality), and some other relevant entities fundamental nature in this little thought exercise.<br><br>But for now i'd like to hear what y'all think of this scheme in general, and of this principle in particular.<br><br>Nicolas<br><br>On 12/1/2011 4:46 PM, Joy Liddicoat wrote: <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Dear all - reflecting on my first few months as a GNSO councillor and the various NCUC and NCSG conversations it occurred, imho, that there seems to be a reasonably frequent resort to *<b>fundamental</b>* principles-type discussions from various voices in the policy discussions (domain name take downs, UDRP review, law enforcement, IPR to name a few) …. Meanwhile I was taking a fresh look at RFC 1591 and participating in a policy principles discussion on TLD policy in New Zealand that was kind of interesting and got me to thinking: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>as a new NCSG member, what do I know about the policy principles that guide the NCSG (not the principles in our various Charters, but policy principles that inform our SG policy inputs as a whole into ICANN related activities)? What are the perspectives on these and what do members think? Are there some core policy principles that we are agreed about? If so, how these could be drawn on to help guide our policy inputs in ICANN related matters (particularly as Councillors responsible for considering issues in light of diverse NCSG views)?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>I am may be mad for thinking about this (and I feel very gratified to be in a SG that will clearly tell me if this is so!) but I would like to initiate a dialogue about this in NCSG – even if it takes some time to work through. I am willing to take responsibility for facilitating this discussion and to, get the ball rolling, wonder if a list of policy principles for NCSG might, for example, look like this: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>NCSG prioritises the non-commercial, public interest aspects of domain name policy.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Guardianship: gTLD policy should be focused on responsibilities and service to the community.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Multi-stakeholder: gTLD policy should be determined by open multi-stakeholder processes.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Human rights: gTLD policy should meet human rights standards, including transparency and the rule of law.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Equity: parties to domain registrations (including non-commercial registrants) should be on a level playing field; domain registrations should be first come first served.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Competition and choice: gTLD policy should ensure competition and choice for non-commercial registrants and non-commercial internet users. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:36.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>In case of conflict, the principle of guardianship prevails.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>If necessary, we can split discussion of each of these policy principles into separate discussions on the list, but perhaps we can start here ….<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Joy<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Joy Liddicoat<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Project Coordinator<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Internet Rights are Human Rights<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><a href="http://www.apc.org" target="_blank">www.apc.org</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Tel: <a href="tel:%2B64%2021%20263%202753" target="_blank">+64 21 263 2753</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Skype id: joy.liddicoat<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'>Yahoo id: <a href="mailto:strategic@xtra.co.nz" target="_blank">strategic@xtra.co.nz</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br clear=all><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>-- <br>Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Member, Board of Directors, CECI, <a href="http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/" target="_blank">http://www.ceci.ca</a><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, <a href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca" target="_blank">www.schulich.yorku.ca</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, <span style='font-family:"Times","serif";color:#0A246A'><a href="http://www.chasquinet.org" target="_blank">www.chasquinet.org</a></span><br>interim Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <a href="http://npoc.org/" target="_blank">http://npoc.org/</a><br>O:<a href="tel:%2B1%20514%20484%207824" target="_blank">+1 514 484 7824</a>; M:<a href="tel:%2B1%20514%20704%207824" target="_blank">+1 514 704 7824</a><br>Skype: alain.berranger<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>