[council] Advice requested by the ICANN Board / Consumer Trust

[Robin Gross]

Good ideas.  Also, in Prague Larry Strickland of NTIA said he would  
be interested in briefing papers from us on these substantive  
issues.  We should send it to USG and other GAC members.

Thank you,
Robin

On Jan 11, 2013, at 3:03 PM, William Drake wrote:

> How about send to board and publish on Circle ID?
>
> On Jan 11, 2013, at 10:47 PM, Wendy Seltzer <wendy at seltzer.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi NCSG,
>>
>> We dissented from this recommendation in Council, but were  
>> outvoted. Do
>> we want to send a letter of our own to the Board?
>>
>> Here was a letter I wrote to the drafting team, that we could  
>> repurpose
>> for the Board:
>>
>> I write because I continue to have strong disagreement with the  
>> "trust"
>> metrics and their presentation. Since I have been unable to make the
>> calls due to persistent scheduling conflicts, I wanted to spell  
>> out the
>> concerns I discussed with several of you in Prague. I appreciate the
>> work that has gone into the metrics, but believe that the "trust"
>> metrics rely on a faulty premise, that gTLDs should be predictable,
>> rather than open to innovative and unexpected new uses.
>>
>> The current draft mistakes a platform, a gTLD, for an end-product.  
>> A key
>> value of a platform is its generativity -- its ability to be used and
>> leveraged by third parties for new, unexpected purposes. Precisely
>> because much innovation is unanticipated, it cannot be predicted  
>> for a
>> chart of measures. Moreover, incentives on the intermediaries to  
>> control
>> their platforms translate into restrictions on end-users' free
>> expression and innovation.
>>
>> Just as we would not want to speak about "trust" in a pad of printing
>> paper, on which anyone could make posters, and we don't ask a road
>> system to interrogate what its drivers plan to do when they reach  
>> their
>> destinations, I think we shouldn't judge DNS registries on their  
>> users'
>> activities.
>>
>> ICANN's planned reviews of and targets for gTLD success should not
>> interfere with market decisions about the utility of various  
>> offerings.
>>
>> In particular, I disagree with the second group of "trust"  
>> metrics, the
>> " Measures related to confidence that TLD operators are fulfilling
>> promises and complying with ICANN policies and applicable national
>> laws:" namely,
>> * Relative incidence of UDRP & URS Complaints; Relative incidence of
>> UDRP & URS Decisions against registrant;
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of intellectual property claims
>> relating to Second Level domain names, and relative cost of overall
>> domain name policing measured at: immediately prior to new gTLD
>> delegation and at 1 and 3 years after delegation;
>> * Quantity of Compliance Concerns w/r/t Applicable National Laws,
>> including reported data security breaches;
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of Domain Takedowns;
>> * Quantity of spam received by a "honeypot" email address in each  
>> new gTLD;
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of fraudulent transactions  
>> caused by
>> phishing sites in new gTLDs;
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of detected phishing sites using  
>> new
>> gTLDs;
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of detected botnets and malware  
>> using
>> new gTLDs
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of sites found to be dealing in or
>> distributing identities and account information used in identity  
>> fraud; and
>> * Quantity and relative incidence of complaints regarding inaccurate,
>> invalid, or suspect WHOIS records in new gTLD
>>
>> Separately, I disagree with the targets for the "redirection,"
>> "duplicates," and "traffic" measures. All of these presume that  
>> the use
>> for new gTLDs is to provide the same type of service to different
>> parties, while some might be used to provide different services to
>> parties including existing registrants.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Wendy
>>
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [council] Advice requested by the ICANN Board
>> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:33:05 -0000
>> From: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com>
>> To: Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com>
>> CC: <bruce.tonkin at icann.org>, "Bill Graham" <bill.graham at icann.org>,
>>    <diane.schroeder at icann.org>, "Bill Graham"  
>> <bill.graham at icann.org>,
>>       "'Glen de Saint Géry'" <Glen at icann.org>,
>> <council at gnso.icann.org>
>>
>> Dear Steve,
>>
>>
>>
>> Please see the attached regarding consumer trust, consumer choice and
>> competition in the context of the domain name system per the 10  
>> December
>> 2010 ICANN board approved resolution (2010.12.10.06).
>>
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan Robinson
>>
>> Chair
>>
>> ICANN GNSO Council
>>
>>
>>
>> <mailto:jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com> jonathan.robinson at ipracon.com
>>
>> skype: jonathan.m.r
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <Letter to ICANN Board re CTCC - 11 January  
>> 2013.pdf><Consumer_Metrics_Advice_FINAL_v4.0_clean.pdf>
>




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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130111/cceb5e7d/attachment-0001.html>