[ncdnhc-discuss] ICANN Board Solicits Input from NCC on .org Redelegation

[Harold J. Feld]

I am pleased to forward a letter from Stuart Lynn.  In response to 
expressions of interest by myself and others, the ICANN Board has 
solicited input from the Consticuency on the .org redelegation.

Adcom will now undertake to form a team of volunteers to perform the 
analysis in accordance with this request.  The final team should be 
relatively compact (ideally 6 people and certainly no more than 10) and 
geographically diverse (ideally representing all five geographic 
regions).  Most importantly, those on the team must be free of conflicts 
and any associations with the bidders must be clearly stated.

In this regard, I have my own potential conflict of interest to state.

Media Access Project (my employer) has a long relationship with the 
Benton Foundation.  We have represented them in several FCC proceedings. 
  In addition, from October 1999 to February 2002, MAP rented office 
space from Benton Foundation at a reduced rate and engaged in several 
joint fundraising projects with Benton (notably on the .us 
redelegation).  Since Febraury 2002, MAP has its own lease, but we are 
located downstairs from Benton and contract with them at market rates 
for network support services. They also serve as our reception area.

The Benton Foundation is partnering with Register.com for its bid.

I do not feel that the institutional relationship between Benton and MAP 
  compromises my impartiality.  However, I am aware that it is necessary 
to avoid even the *appearance* of impropriety and conflict of interest. 
  Accordingly, I ask whether you believe I should recuse myself from the
evaluation process.

I have forwarded this declaration to Stuart Lynn.  He informs me that 
the ICANN will consider whether I should recuse myself from the 
evaluation.  Because of the short time frame, however, I have undertaken 
to begin the organizational effort.

Volunteers should contact me directly at hfeld at mediaaccess.org.

I stress that because of the short time frame for evaluation, every 
member of the task force must be prepared to make a serious commitment 
of time to the project.  ICANN has expressed a willingness to defer some 
reasonable expenses associated with teleconferences, contingent on 
receiving a request outlining such expenses. It is anticipated at this 
point that expenses will be limited to telephone conferences among team 
members and possible calls to listed supporters of the bids to verify 
support.

I want to thank Stuart Lynn and the ICANN Board for providing this 
opportunity for consticuency input.  I am confident that our 
consticuency is capable of meeting this challenge.

Stuart Lynn's letter follows below.

Harold Feld
____________________________________________________________
Harold and Milton have kindly (and enthusiasticly) offered the NCDNHC's 
assistance in the evaluation of the eleven .org applications that were 
submitted.  We greatly appreciate this offer.

In finalizing arrangements for the evaluation, we would find it very 
useful to receive from the NCDNHC its evaluation of each application 
based on criteria 4, 5, and 6 of the eleven that have been published at 
<http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/criteria.htm>.  The published 
explanations of these three criteria, which are the ones most within the 
NCDNHC's area of special knowledge and interest, are reproduced below 
this message. Evaluations of the applications with respect to the other 
criteria will be conducted by other groups with the appropriate expertise.

It is very important that ICANN's evaluation of each application be done 
in a thorough and evenhanded manner, according to the published 
criteria, and only according to publicly posted documentation. 
Accordingly, the NCDNHC's evaluation will be most useful to the overall 
effort if the evaluations of each application on each of the three 
criteria are based on a documented, reasoned analysis, and if care is 
taken to ensure that the evaluators hold no present or anticipated 
financial interest with respect to any of the applicants.

Materials that are available in connection with these three criteria 
include (a) the applications (posted at 
<http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/applications/>), particularly the 
responses to items C38 (criterion 4), C35 (criterion 5), and C36 
(criterion 6); the presentations at the Public Forum on 26 June in 
Bucharest (see <http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/> for links); and the 
web-based public comment forum <http://forum.icann.org/org/>.  We 
understand that the NCDNHC also received presentations by several 
bidders.  (If these or other materials are relied on in the analysis 
they should be made part of the posted record--please send them to Louis 
  Touton for that purpose.)

We are currently in the process of establishing a revised schedule for 
the evaluation, since it now seems clear that some delays will be 
necessary to do a top-quality evaluation.  However, to meet the need to 
have the selected applicant in place for a timely transition from 
VeriSign we believe that any NCDNHC evaluation would be needed by 
approximately 15 August 2002.

Please let me know whether you believe that the NCDNHC could provide 
assistance as outlined above.  Thanks again for your enthusiastic 
participation.

Best regards,

Stuart

==================================================================
            EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR NCDNHC ANALYSIS
     (Criteria 4, 5, and 6 with explanations as posted at
        <http://www.icann.org/tlds/org/criteria.htm>.)

4. Differentiation of the .org TLD.

A key objective is differentiation of the .org TLD from TLDs intended
for commercial purposes. Appropriate marketing practices are a
primary tool for achieving that objective. Proposals should include
detailed planned marketing practices designed to differentiate the
.org TLD, promote and attract registrations from the global
noncommercial community, and minimize defensive and duplicative
registrations.

5. Inclusion of mechanisms for promoting the registry's operation in
a manner that is responsive to the needs, concerns, and views of the
noncommercial Internet user community.

The successor operator's policies and practices should strive to be
responsive to and supportive of the noncommercial Internet user
community, and reflect as much of its diversity as possible.
Consideration will be given to mechanisms proposed for achieving this
responsiveness and supportiveness. A broad variety of mechanisms are
possible, such as teaming between for-profit and non-profit
organizations and establishment of governing or advisory groups for
the operation of the .org registry that include representatives of
the noncommercial Internet user community.

Where representative governing or advisory groups are proposed, the
proposal should ensure a mechanism for providing all .org registrants
with the opportunity to participate in that mechanism, either through
the selection of members, or through some other means. The bylaws or
other documents establishing the groups should provide explicitly for
an open, transparent, and participatory process by which .org
operating policies are initiated, reviewed, and revised in a manner
that reflects the interests of .org domain name holders and is
consistent with the terms of its registry agreement with ICANN.

6. Level of support for the proposal from .org registrants.

Demonstrated support among registrants in the .org TLD, particularly
those actually using .org domain names for noncommercial purposes,
will be a factor in evaluation of the proposals. Noncommercial
registrants do not have uniform views about policy and management,
and no single organization can fully encompass the diversity of
global civil society. There will likely be significant difficulties
in ascertaining the level of support for particular .org proposals
from throughout the .org registrants and noncommercial community.
Nevertheless, proposals to operate the .org TLD should provide
available evidence of support from across the global Internet
community.

-- 

__________________
Stuart Lynn
President and CEO
ICANN
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Tel: 310-823-9358
Fax: 310-823-8649
Email: lynn at icann.org