[ALAC] [At-Large] [Registrants-rights] That Revised PICDRP

Thu Oct 3 23:56:25 UTC 2013

Hear, hear, Holly.

I'd say there are at least 3 deliverables in that intervention:

1. An ALAC statement on the overall sorry state of new gTLD program - let's
draft one, I'm ready to work on it. Any other volunteers?

2. A Public Forum intervention on the same.

3. A discussion in Buenos Aires (if not at a MS roundtable, then at least
at an ALAC policy discussion session). The fight over time slots seems
intense - you wouldn't believe how many sessions the IDN WG session
overlaps with (as an example of a struggle for time and people).  As I
recalled, it clashes with capacity building, Atlas II and some other
things, and that is just within the community, not even factoring external
activities.

Rinalia
 On Oct 4, 2013 7:24 AM, "Holly Raiche" <h.raiche at internode.on.net> wrote:

> I guess it is my turn.
>
> One of my real objections to the proposed and Sally led meeting Monday
> afternoon is that we were planning a third multi stakeholder forum - this
> time on the new gTLDs - to have a hard look at the many many issues that we
> have raised and finally ask is there anything that can be done.  That
> includes PICS, it includes the metrics, it includes the totally nonsensical
> rulings on con/can and the singular plural issue, and the IP issues, and
> the issues of applicant support.  In the end, it is a litany of quick fixes
> that have not fixed.  So maybe time to say so, rather than object to each
> issue individually.
>
> That said, yes, the PICS were an add on, largely at the GAC request that,
> if people say they are going to do something, then they should do it.  But
> enforcing it after the fact has proved - not surprisingly - very
> problematic.  Another issue with the gTLDs gone bad.
>
> Maybe the multi stakeholder forum - if it is held - could be titled what
> is right with the new gTLDs.  It would be a very short session.
>
> Holly
>
>
> On 04/10/2013, at 7:29 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
> > Now it is my turn to ++1 Carlton :-)
> >
> > The process is stacked to the advantage of registries, to the
> disadvantage
> > of registrants who much pay for the system, and heavily against
> > non-registrant end-users who see the promises coming undone.
> >
> > Most unnerving is the explicit references to "repeat offenders", which
> IMO
> > is deliberately targeting potential watchdog groups that would object on
> > public interest grounds.
> >
> > The process for creating PICs was shaky enough. The process for enforcing
> > them is a sham, designed for public relations value without actually
> > providing significant public benefit. Like Applicantg Support and the
> > public (ALAC/Ombudsman) Objection process, they are complex in design and
> > will see next to no use.
> >
> > The problems are embedded and cultural, no amount of tweaking will fix
> this.
> >
> > Does the ALAC have the courage to point out this program's utter failure
> to
> > the Board?
> >
> > - Evan
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3 October 2013 12:14, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> So, the PICDRP is revised.  Yawn.
> >>
> >> For sure, it is a poster child for what lawyers call - often times with
> >> tongue firmly rooted in cheek - 'due process'. Regrettably and in
> IMMHO, it
> >> yet remains a creature that is all 'sound and fury, signifying nothing'.
> >> Yes, in the end, it is still not worth a warm bucket of spit.
> >>
> >> The fundamental problem remains; it is a high bar we raise to deny
> >> companies the right to change a business model - or approach to
> >> implementing a model - in process. That is a flightless buzzard of a
> bird.
> >>
> >> The notion of 'to report is to offend' remains. Now, I freely admit
> that as
> >> a free thinker, all orthodoxies remain suspect absent they are forced
> thru
> >> the crucible of reason.  But this position as a conceptual framework is
> and
> >> remains so injurious to perceptions of good governance it is practically
> >> indecent!
> >>
> >> I have excerpted and highlighted a part of the revised procedure below.
> It
> >> frames what follows better than I could; it is as if ICANN had engaged a
> >> circular firing squad to execute PIC enforcement:
> >>
> >> *"1.3 .....ICANN will conduct a preliminary review of the PIC report to
> >> ensure that it is complete and states a claim of non-compliance with
> one or
> >> more PICs. ICANN also will make a determination as to*
> >> *PICDRP- 2*
> >> *whether the Reporter is in good standing and is not a Repeat Offender
> as
> >> set forth below in Section 5. *
> >> *
> >> *
> >> *ICANN’s preliminary review is not intended to evaluate the merits of
> the
> >> allegations, but whether the Reporter has completed all of the reporting
> >> obligations.*
> >> *
> >> *
> >> *In particular, ICANN will review whether the Reporter has: (i)
> identified
> >> the proper parties; (ii) identified at least one PIC with which the
> >> Registry Operator failed to comply, (iii) alleged how the Reporter has
> been
> >> harmed; and (iv) set forth the grounds of the claim and submitted
> >> appropriate documentation to support the report of non-compliance.*
> >> *
> >> *
> >> *1.4** If the PIC report fails the preliminary review, ICANN will notify
> >> the Reporter and the Registry Operator, and **the PIC report will be
> >> closed.
> >> *
> >> *
> >> *
> >> *2. Initial Review of the PIC Report and Conference*
> >> *2.1 If the PIC report passes ICANN’s preliminary review, ICANN will
> >> forward the report to the Registry Operator (through its Abuse Point of
> >> Contact) and notify the Reporter that the PIC report has been forwarded
> to
> >> the Registry Operator.*"
> >>
> >> -Carlton
> >>
> >>
> >> ==============================
> >> Carlton A Samuels
> >> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> >> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
> >> =============================
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Registrants-rights mailing list
> >> Registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registrants-rights
> >>
> >> WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/vo4i
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Evan Leibovitch
> > Toronto Canada
> >
> > Em: evan at telly dot org
> > Sk: evanleibovitch
> > Tw: el56
> > _______________________________________________
> > Registrants-rights mailing list
> > Registrants-rights at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registrants-rights
> >
> > WG Wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/vo4i
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>