IOC/Red Cross public comments period

[Konstantinos Komaitis]

Dear all,

I've just submitted my comments on this issue: http://forum.icann.org/lists/ioc-rcrc-proposal/msg00005.html

Thanks to everyone that has so far submitted comments. Good stuff!

KK

From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com<mailto:gakuru at gmail.com>>
Reply-To: Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com<mailto:gakuru at gmail.com>>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 06:43:12 +0000
To: "NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>" <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU<mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] IOC/Red Cross public comments period

Thank you for this opportunity to express a strong opposition to granting special rights to International Olympics Committee and International Red Cross.

The new gTLD programme was designed to liberate a hitherto naming-constrained domain space. Democratise the domain names by widening allowed name types thereby increasing innovation, consumer choice and an equitable participation by all people of the world. Expand and protect space  for expression and contexts to others and the missing, unheard voices around the world.

As of 04 March, 2012 www.acronymfinder.com<http://www.acronymfinder.com> reported 96 verified and 250 other definitions for IRC and 76 verified 250 other definitions for IOC. ( Annex I to this message)

Any ICANN Board decision to grant “IRC” and “IOC” special, exclusive name rights to International Olympics Committee and International Red Cross essentially means cutting off denying 670 other online existing organisations rights to their own names. Plausible risks including being viewed as censorship via ICANN domain naming policy.

As of 31 December, 2011, we accounted for a paltry 6.2 per cent of global internet users numbers.  In June 2011 the global average of people to domain name stood at a ratio 90:1, Africa's ratio was  10,000 people per domain name. (See Annex II to this message.)

Africa is rich in names and content which her peoples are now very busy preparing to take online.

Any such names special protections precedents translates to denying Africa their names, at present not online, and unfortunate policy reinforcing belief that developed countries interests resolve to ensure that Africa remains enslaved in the modern age digital plantations. Therefore very strongly opposed to this serious threat entire Africa's public interest.

Trusting reasonable, global, multi-stakeholder, consensus driven ICANN cannot permit “all names equal but some are more equal than others ” further considering, “For delegation requests for new generic TLDS (gTLDs), the Contractor shall include documentation to demonstrate how the  proposed string has received consensus support from relevant  stakeholders and is supported by the global public interest."

Regardless of any powerful stakeholder and/or special interests pushing for preferential treatment of Red Cross and IOC, I urge the ICANN Board to decline granting such selective special protections.

Should Red Cross and IOC be granted any special name rights, this precedent may spark endless name disputes and possible litigations with ICANN at the centre.

Respectfully submitted,


Alex Gakuru, Africa Representative
Non-Commercial Users Constituency

04 March, 2012

(Annexes attached)

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Konstantinos Komaitis <k.komaitis at strath.ac.uk<mailto:k.komaitis at strath.ac.uk>> wrote:
Dear all,

The public comments period concerning the special protection for the Red Cross and Olympic terms has now opened and can be accessed through http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/ioc-rcrc-proposal-02mar12-en.htm

As you know this is an issue which has raised and continues to raise significant issues relating to transparency, multistakeholder input , the role of the GAC and its relationship with the GNSO as well as issues relating to the expansion of existing rights to the potential detriment of other rights holders.

May I request that everybody who has commented, and everyone who wanted to comment, to please do so? The timeframe is considerably strict, but at some point there was even a suggestion to skip it!

Cheers

Konstantinos