gTLD for developing regions was Re: [] knitters needle

[Alain Berranger]

Hi Adam, Avri, Rafik,

I think working on these issues together will see our two Constituencies
develop some synergies...

Alain

On Wednesday, July 4, 2012, Rafik Dammak wrote:

> Hi Avri,
>
> while we can continue the work about new gTLD program, we should also
> cover another topic which is about having more registrars from developing
> countries to serve users there. we had such discussion when we presented
> the JAS 2nd milestone report last year and we had same comments  again
> during ICANN meeting in prague. there are some particularities and issues
> like payments methods (yes credit card is not something common), pricing
> etc which limit the access to domains to registrants
> especially individuals from developing countries. new gTLD could fix some
> problems with more community-based registries and benefiting the more
> relaxed vertical integration rules, but ICANN missed such opportunity.
>
> I am also wondering if the new RAA with new provisions creates de facto
>  new economic and technical barriers to new entrants from developing
> regions and only benefits to incumbents (what about competition and
> anti-trust?) while possible provisions like validation and verification
> won't encourage those incumbents registrars to operate in Africa for
> example. For RAA negotiations, that can be another point to work on it in
> addition to our concerns about privacy, FoE and anonymity.  All these are
> good to question the public interest task for ICANN and its role to
> encourage real competition and diversity for the benefit of registrants
> like non-commercial with more operators serving their communities.
> I guess that we need on work on that,
> and still work to be done for support applicant for second round if there
> is,
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik Dammak
> @rafik
> "fight for the users"
>
>
>
> 2012/7/4 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>
> Hi,
>
> This is something worth working on.
>
> While I was very much against working according to categories in this
> round, it was largely because I thought the categories were something
> emergent.  I don't think we all could have agreed on the set categories
> before.  But now we can. Or at least can come close.
>
> I think that the developing region applications are obviously a category
> that was not sufficiently included.
>
> As we start to think and plan for the next round, I think we could/should
> consider limiting it to categories, i.a. such as developing regions.  I
> beleive remediating failures in diversity etc should be one of the primary
> goals of the next round.  I expect that this may be a controversial
> perspective, perhaps even within NCSG, so it is going to take some
> discussion on:
>
> - whether a next round should be constrained across some but not all
> categories
> - if so, which categories
>
> It might be good to start figuring out if we, as NCSG collectively, or
> [NCUC, NPOC] separately, have viewpoints on such issues.
>
> avri
>
> PS: I love the way threads wander and morph in a living list.
>
> On 4 Jul 2012, at 09:15, Adam Peake wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Is Africa, really, part of ICANN? the 'reveal' showed that 99.99 per
> cent of
> >> new gTLDs were from outside Africa which only managed to submit a palty
> 0.88
> >> per cent of the 1930 applications. As developed economies IP industry
> and
> >> brand owners entrench themselves deeper on ICANN, we're wondering,
> what's
> >> wrong with this model for Africa?
> >>
> >
> >
> > Alex, not just Africa, developing countries/region generally. Also
> > equal lack of applicants from Latin America and Caribbean, and
> > majority of Asia Pacific.
> > <http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus>
> >
> > Plenty of applications from the Asia Pacific when taken across the
> > whole region, but only from the developed markets (China and India in
> > the ICT sector can be classed as developed.)
> >
> > Failure of outreach, or just a reflection of economics. NCSG should
> > talk with the GAC about this.  GAC's quite animated, complained to the
> > board.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Alain Berranger <
> alain.berranger at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Avri,
> >>>
> >>> It is clear to me too that NCUC/pre NPOC NCSG is a community of some
> kind
> >>> - I just don't quite grasp its essence yet, but what is sure is that I
> don't
> >>> yet feel part of it.
> >>>
> >>> Looking back to Prague, at no times were any of the 5 NPOC members
> there
> >>> made to feel full members of that community. For instance, at your own
> dot
> >>> gay event at the sky bar, all NCUC members present were invited, but
> not a
> >>> single NPOC member was invited. When NCSG EC had informal gatherings,
> never
> >>> once were NPOC members included. That said, NPOC members there did not
> lack
> >>> social interaction with other Constituencies.
> >>>
> >>> Yes Avri, you and I agree on the need for an NCUC email list for the
> NCUC
> >>> community.. Keeping NCSG list for building the new NCSG community made
> out
> >>> of both NCUC and NPOC members.
> >>>
> >>> Alain
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tuesday, July 3, 2012, Avri Doria wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry to hear that.
> >>>> It is part of what makes us a community instead of just a SG.
> >>>>
> >>>> Would have enjoyed hearing your voice as well.
> >>>> Though I guess I just did.
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW:  I still think we need an announce list of the news and only the
> >>>> news for those members whole don't like all the touchy feely group,
> aka
> >>>> unprofessional, participation.  I would like the NCSG EC to
> reconsider its
> >>>> decision from last year not to create such
>
>

--
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI,
http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20120704/bbe37207/attachment-0001.html>