[council] Registry changes PDP (fwd)

[Marc Schneiders]

The Names Council is still busy with the so-called new-registry
services. This is an attempt to avoid another Sitefinder surprise.

Below my views as posted to the council (which deals with the topic
itself and not through a task force).

Suggestions more than welcome!

Marc

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:26:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: Marc Schneiders <marc at schneiders.org>
To: council at gnso.icann.org
Subject: [council] Registry changes PDP

I have two fundamental problems with the flow charts/process:

1. (In
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/reg-com/png00004.png sub
3)

Why does ICANN have to look at the business side of the proposal? I'd
say this is irrelevant to the job of ICANN. Unless it involves
monopoly issues, which is more related to the technical implementation
(cf. e.g. WLS). Wheter the proposal is sound from a business
perspective is none of ICANN's business.

2. Where does the GNSO (users, which I am supposed to represent) come
in if staff decides a quick look is OK or no approval needed? I see it
in the flow chart, but this is then the repeal process.
We all know this is NOT in place. So it is of no use to refer people
to that, is it? I may not understand.

I do not think it is worthwhile to spend time to device a bureacratic
procedure that has no safe guards for users except litigation. Users
cannot afford that or are not organised enough to let it materialize.
Users make no money from domain names. That explains it. ICANN does
not do user protection. I understand that (though feel it is wrong
since ICANN manages a restricted market). Those who are in the domain
name industry do organise for obvious reasons. Feel free to say that
domain name registrants should do the same. They have less incentive
though. It is a great principle of law to protect the most weak, even
if it is their own fault. So let's do that?

Thank you.


Marc Schneiders
NCUC council rep