[ncdnhc-discuss] ccSO

[Kent Crispin]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 09:52:50AM +0900, Chun Eung Hwi wrote:
> Dear Kent Crispin and others,
> Kent, I have some questions. 
> Do ASO and PSO have constituency structure? I have never heard that. 
> So far as I know it, each ccTLD has their own governance struncture

If by "governance structure" you mean some kind of representative
structure, your statement is not correct.  Some ccTLDs have a governance
structure, some do not.

> within
> their own cc territories although the form of governance structure is very
> diverse and within their own governance structures, each group represents
> their own interests.

This simply isn't true, as a general statement.

> Of course, I don't know how democratic structure .us
> ccTLD would have, but it would have such a thing.

Your statement isn't clear.  If you are using .us as an example, and are
saying that a requirement of formation of a ccSO would be that each
ccTLD would have to demonstrate some kind of democratic governance
structure, thein I think that would be a very hard condition to meet. 

If you are referring to the .us "governance structure" then it clearly 
isn't a "democratic structure".

> > It is certainly the case that creation of a ccSO would globally weaken
> > the position of all the "user" interests (Business, IP, NC etc), because
> > those interests would now have another forum to deal with, and other
> > processes to worry about.  Creation of a gtldSO would make matters even 
> > worse, from the point of view of the user community.
> 
> As I mentioned it above, user interests could be represented by each
> ccTLD's governance structure.

They *could* be, but in general they are not.  Indeed it is conceivable 
that a ccSO could be structured so that each individual cctld would be 
required to have a "democratic" structure.  But, as a whole, they are 
very far from that.

> I agree that gtldSO could be very bad to
> user interests. Then why are you directly linking the idea of ccSO with
> gtldSO? Although gTLD and ccTLD are registry, their jurisdiction is quite
> different. I recognize that some of ccTLDs are deviated from the original
> spirit of ccTLD because they are seeking commercial interests rather than
> public interests of local internet community within their territories.
> However, ccTLDs are far more different in its representing interests and
> governance from gTLDs. 

I think you are mixing up two very different things, to tell you the
truth.  The early ccTLD delegations were to academic instutions,
non-profits, and so on, and many of those organizations are fine
organizations indeed.  But this is a completely different thing than a
"democratic governance structure".  Neither academic instutions or 
non-profits in general provide a "governance structure".

Moreover, your arguements presume that ccTLDs are localized to their
regions.  They are not -- they are globally visible, and have 
registrants and users from all over the world, not just their own 
country.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent at songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain