[ALAC] Fwd: Registries Not Happy with Registry Agreement

Sun May 5 15:30:54 UTC 2013

Dear JJ:
Evan has promised to send you something that might go nicely with what is
advocated here.

I truly value your judgment and advice. So from me personally, it is always
gratifying to know that you - and other colleagues - are so in touch with
the influences that colour my view of the world.

Best,
-Carlton

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:15 PM, JJS <jjs.global at gmail.com> wrote:

> *Brilliant analysis Carlton, with the added spice of your style, wherein
> one recognizes some generous ingredients from Fitzgerald, Naipaul, Rushdie.
> A joy to read!*
> *
> *
> *Recently, under the aegis of Google,** a "domain name association" was
> formed, *
> *http://www.whatdomain.org/
> *
> *
> *
> *Where does the global public interest fit into all of this? 3 points:*
> *
> *
> *- The creation of such a business association lifts any ambiguity about
> whether ICANN should or should not also serve as the domain business
> association. Clearly, business taking care of its own interests outside of
> ICANN relieves our corporation from having to worry about those who
> benefitted and still benefit from the land grab.*
> *
> *
> *- I'd take this even a step further: the "domain name association" will
> most likely be overwhelmingly English-language, US-based and therefore
> under US laws regarding trademarks, "intellectual property" (please read
> "keep off my grass, I got here first"), with a fair proportion of smaller
> actors in Australia, New Zealand, etc. This association will replicate the
> current standards, with little room for *registries* from elsewhere. So I
> would strongly advocate the formation of "domain name associations" in
> other parts of the world, with the view of creating, one day, a truly
> worldwide association which would not be beholden unto the mainly US big
> players.*
> *
> *
> *- Without waiting for that to happen, we should take position on the
> fact that the creation of a "domain name association" does indeed lift any
> remaining ambiguity about the remit of ICANN. We should make clear that it
> is ICANN's duty to serve, above anything else, the global public interest.
> We should be able to fit this topic into the over-arching theme I suggested
> in an e-mail sent around yesterday for Atlas-2, "The User Perspective".*
> *
> *
> *Best regards,*
> *Jean-Jacques.*
>
>
> 2013/5/4 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
>
>> Ah well... if and only if....
>>
>> .....ICANN would declare the global public interest as its reason to be.
>>  And if it'd just get over itself and flat out say 'we a regulator!' all
>> this argumentation over the unilateral right to amend from the RySG would
>> be just some pissing in  the wind.
>>
>> The fact is ICANN unilaterally gave registries license to monetize
>> character strings, known and hitherto unknown.  And then ICANN took a
>> little shaving from that gift, called a fee.  You see so-called third
>> world
>> fleshpots condemned for the exact same thing with tones of high
>> moral dudgeon.   Not to make too fine a point of it, the registry
>> operators
>> got themselves a gift that keeps on giving; a protected market, all of us
>> lessees. Quite apart from the unlucky - or plain dumb - few, they're all
>> the better for it.
>>
>> Now, here's the catch. Such action most places are usually in the gift of
>> the state. And the state tends to raise a statist actor, sometimes called
>> a
>> regulator - and in noisome places, a regular 'bagman' - to protect its
>> interests. The common method to retain some measure of control is a
>> license; see the definitive meaning of that term.  And since that license
>> is the fiat of the state, it usually is handed down, no input from the
>> licensee other than their name and particulars. Take it. Or, leave it.
>>
>> If ICANN would just come out and state the obvious, "I am a regulator,
>> suck
>> on it' all this unpleasantness would've been avoided.
>>
>> The contract is supposed to reflect ICANN standing athwarts the portal,
>> like Leonidas guarding that gateway to Thermopylae, as it were, protecting
>> the global public interests from the marauding - go with the metaphor now!
>> - 'contracted parties'.  The figment is the claim that the contract is
>> this
>> bastion of consensus policy making.  That is overstating the facts and
>> brushing the line beyond which propaganda begins. For the contracted
>> parties no way in hell see the rest of the community as having a say in
>> all
>> this.  Quick now, who can recall them crying out for all of us, the fry,
>> being invited to the party?
>>
>> To be brutally frank, I see this kvetching of Chuck Gomes and the RySG
>> crowd purely as a manifestation of impatience with the assault on their
>> sense of exceptionalism.  Message from me: count your fingers going in.
>> And
>> count 'em again, coming out.
>>
>> -Carlton
>>
>>
>> ==============================
>> Carlton A Samuels
>> Mobile: 876-818-1799
>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
>>
>> =============================
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>>
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
>> > Date: 3 May 2013 17:10
>> > Subject: Registries Not Happy with Registry Agreement
>> > To: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
>> >
>> >
>> > Powerful comments from Chuck Gomes & Verisign about the proposed
>> Registry
>> > Agreement and ICANN's lack of good faith in the negotiation process:
>> >
>> >
>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-base-agreement-29apr13/msg00002.html
>> >
>> > It would seem things aren't as cheery and ready to close on RA as ICANN
>> > said.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Robin
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ALAC mailing list
>> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>> >
>> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>> > ALAC Working Wiki:
>> >
>> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> ALAC mailing list
>> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>
>> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>> ALAC Working Wiki:
>> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>>
>
>