Draft Statement of NCUC on the Draft Applicant Guidebook

Fri Dec 10 19:59:44 CET 2010

+1 inc. Mary's suggestions.
j

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Nicolas Adam <nickolas.adam at gmail.com>wrote:

>  I think Mary's points are valid, and i will just add: go team!
> Thx Robin, Mary, Milton and everyone else who worked on this.
>
> Nicolas
>
>
> On 12/10/2010 11:56 AM, Mary Wong wrote:
>
> In principle and substance, yes - but I would feel more comfortable, and
> believe it would be more effective, if the references to ICANN staff (e.g.
> "as claimed by staff") were removed or at least reduced. Similarly, I would
> suggest rewording the point about the "company who provides the expert
> advice is also hired by ICANN" to something along the lines of "the third
> party contracted to select the experts who will determine the objection".
>
> Cheers
> Mary
>
>
>  *Mary W S Wong*
> *Professor of Law*
> *Chair, Graduate IP Programs*
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH
> 03301 USA Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on
> the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
> http://ssrn.com/author=437584 >>>
>     *From: * Drake William <william.drake at GRADUATEINSTITUTE.CH><william.drake at GRADUATEINSTITUTE.CH>
> *To:* <NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu><NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>
> *Date: * 12/10/2010 11:50 AM  *Subject: * Re: Draft Statement of NCUC on
> the Draft Applicant Guidebook  Sure
>
>  Bill
>
>  On Dec 10, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Robin Gross wrote:
>
>  Here's the draft NCUC statement on the DAG and new gtlds.  Please let me
> know if you support it's submission.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Robin
>
>
> Draft Statement of NCUC on the Draft Applicant Guidebook
>
> NCUC supports the prompt introduction of new gTLDs, yet we are deeply
> concerned about a number of implementation proposals in the latest Draft
> Applicant Guidebook, however believe they can be fixed and the new TLD
> process can move forward.
>
> In particular, we are concerned that the Independent Objector (IO) process
> is ripe for abuse and harmful to the public interest. The IO was a staff
> created policy that was never discussed let alone approved by the GNSO.  We
> believe that it is entirely illogical that there can be a TLD that no
> community, religion, government, company, trademark holder, or individual in
> the world actually objects to – yet is “something we all agree is
> objectionable” as claimed by staff.
>
> Important safeguards to prevent abuse and “gaming” are lacking from the IO,
> as envisioned by staff.  For example, there is no requirement that an
> objection brought by the IO be tied to at least one specific party who
> claims it will be harmed if the TLD goes forward.  Such a requirement is
> necessary to achieve accountability in the new TLD process.
>
> Another feature missing from staff’s version of an IO is transparency.
>  ICANN staff has stated a number of times that the IO is intended to provide
> a secret means for governments to object to a TLD string without having to
> do so publicly.  For a public governance organization with transparency
> requirements, such a proposal for secret objections cannot stand.  If there
> must be an IO, actual objectors must come forward and be transparent about
> their role to prevent the new TLD.
>
> According the staff memo on so-called Morality and Public Order objections,
> one of the purposes of the IO is “risk mitigation” to ICANN (i.e. a forum to
> quietly kill controversial TLDs to ward-off ICANN’s ability to be sued in
> courts of law).  We do not support staff’s introduction of “risk mitigation
> strategy” as ICANN’s primary policy objective.  As always, the global public
> interest with respect to the DNS is ICANN’s primary obligation, not ICANN’s
> own corporate interest.
>
> As designed by staff, the IO lacks true independence.  The IO is employed
> by ICANN; likewise the company who provides the expert advice is also hired
> by ICANN, so there is a lack of neutrality on the part of the expert panel
> since they have an incentive to agree with the IO (ICANN) who hired it when
> they handle matters brought by the IO.
>
> On the issue of trademarks in the latest DAG, we are troubled by the
> elimination of sufficient time in which to respond to URS complaints in the
> latest DAG.  Re-working the negotiated community consensus from 21 to 14
> days as a timeframe in which to respond is concerning as it provides
> inadequate protection to registrants, who may be on holidays and unable to
> find an attorney and respond in a reasonable period of time.
>
> We share the concerns expressed in the At-Large Statement on Draft
> Applicant Guidebook.  However, we believe the best course of action is to
> make the appropriate fixes to the policy to protect the global public
> interest and go forward with new TLDs in an expeditious manner.
>
>
>
>  <NCSG stmt on rec6>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org
>
>
>
>
>   ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> www.williamdrake.org
>  ***********************************************************
>
>
>
>
>  As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with the
> University of New Hampshire and is now known as the *University of New
> Hampshire School of Law.* Please note that all email addresses have
> changed and now follow the convention: firstname.lastname at law.unh.edu. For
> more information on the *University of New Hampshire School of Law*, please
> visit *law.unh.edu*
>
>

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
  Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20101210/cefbba06/attachment-0001.html>