[ALAC] FW: European Commission comments - ICANN Auction Rules in the new gTLD program

Rinalia Abdul Rahim rinalia.abdulrahim at gmail.com
Wed Feb 5 01:55:56 UTC 2014


When there is mutually reinforcing advocacy from the GAC side and the ALAC
on issues, it is a very good day for the Public Interest.

Best regards,

Rinalia
On Feb 5, 2014 3:39 AM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> please be so kind to find below the European Commission comments
> regarding ICANN Auction Rules in the new gTLD program which takes into
> account the ALAC's Statement on the Preferential Treatment for Community
> Application in String Contention.
> https://community.icann.org/x/MlV-Ag
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
> ALAC Chair
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:        FW: European Commission comments - ICANN Auction Rules in
> the
> new gTLD program
> Date:   Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:26:37 +0000
> From:   <Camino.MANJON at ec.europa.eu>
> To:
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> Please find below the European Commission comments pertaining to the
> current ICANN Auction Rules.
>
>
>
> Feel free to distribute among your contacts in case you deem it useful.
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
> */_ _/*
>
> */_Ms Camino Manjon Sierra_/*
> European Commission - DG Communication Networks, Content and Technology
> Unit D1 (International relations)
>
> Internet Governance; ICANN GAC; EU Registry; Internet and Human Rights
>
> Desk Officer Iran, Syria , Sudan, Iraq & Yemen
>
> Avenue de Beaulieu 25 (5/98) / B-1049 / Brussels / Belgium
> *T*: +32-2-29-78797
>
> *M*: +32-488-203-447
>
> Twitter @caminomanjon
>
> Linked-In https://www.linkedin.com/pub/camino-manjon/50/b20/240
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*BABA-NAS Youness (CNECT) *On Behalf Of *CORUGEDO STENEBERG Linda
> (CNECT)
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 04, 2014 3:59 PM
> *To:* comments-new-gtld-auction-rules-16dec13 at icann.org
> *Cc:* HARTOG Eddy (CNECT); FORSBERG Lars-Erik (CNECT); MANJON Camino
> (CNECT)
> *Subject:* European Commission comments - ICANN Auction Rules in the new
> gTLD program
>
>
>
> Dear ICANN,
>
>
>
> The European Commission appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
> recently updated ICANN's New gTLD Auction Rules and welcomes ICANN's
> interest in the community views expressed in Buenos Aires, including at
> the GAC and Public Forum.
>
>
>
> Please find below our comments.
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
> *Linda CORUGEDO STENEBERG****
> **DIRECTOR**
> ** **
> *cid:image001.gif at 01CF20CF.7DAF3FF0*
> **European Commission**
> *Communications networks, Content and Technologies Directorate-General,
> DG CONNECT*
> *Cooperation, Directorate D
>
> EU GAC representative*
> **
> *BU 25 06/24*
> *B-1049 Brussels/Belgium*
> *+32 22996383
>
> Mobile+32-498996383*
> *linda.corugedo-steneberg at ec.europa.eu
> <mailto:linda.corugedo-steneberg at ec.europa.eu>
>
>
>
>
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *Public Comment on new gTLD Auction Rules*
>
>
>
> *1.       **General comments*
>
> We are deeply concerned about the implications that the Auction Rules in
> the gTLD program may have for the protection of public policy interests,
> competition, openness and innovation. As a general principle, ICANN
> should implement Auction Rules that are consistent with its Bylaws, its
> non-for profit status, the objectives of the new gTLD Program and the
> Applicant Guidebook to promote competition, diversity, innovation and
> consumer choice. As expressed in several comments already submitted
> during the comment period, the current Auction Rules are advantageous
> for portfolio applicants rather than for small, innovative and community
> applicants, which is at odds with the "diversity and innovation" policy
> that ICANN seeks to promote. It would be desirable to give these
> applicants a more even playing field when they come up against larger
> portfolio holders in the contention process. Also, ICANN's auction rules
> has not yet proven convincing to the community and deserves being
> revisited in light of the input received.
>
>
>
> *2.       **Relevant GAC advice*
>
> The European Commission regards positively the explicit mention in the
> Auction Rules of the need to "resolve any applicable GAC advice" prior
> to the participation in the auction process, as part of the applicant's
> "eligibility" criteria, but regrets the lack of reference to "community
> applications" or applications with community support, despite the
> reiterated GAC advise. In this regard the European Commission seizes
> this opportunity to recall the following passages of recent GAC advice:
>
>
>
> ·         "The GAC advises the board that in those cases where a
> community, which is clearly impacted by a set of new gTLD applications
> in contention, has expressed a collective and clear opinion on those
> applications, such opinion should be duly taken into account, together
> with all other relevant information." (Beijing Communique)
>
> ·         "The GAC reiterates its advice from the Beijing Communiqué
> regarding preferential treatment for all applications which have
> demonstrable community support, while noting community concerns over the
> high costs for pursuing a Community Objection process as well as over
> the high threshold for passing Community Priority Evaluation". (Durban
> Communique)
>
> ·         "The GAC requests a briefing on the public policy implications
> of holding auctions to resolve string contention (including community
> applications)." (Buenos Aires Communique).
>
> It is essential that the outcome of the briefing on the public policy
> implications of holding auctions requested in the Buenos Aires GAC
> Communique and the reflections of the GAC on this particular issue are
> fully taken into account when defining the Auction Rules. Particularly,
> the auction process _should not_ be initiated until the GAC's briefing
> request is duly addressed by the ICANN Board.
>
> * *
>
> *3.       **ALAC - Community applications statement*
>
> It is important to make a specific reference to the At-Large Community
> (ALAC) statement of 9.08.2013 on preferential treatment for community
> applications in string contention; ALAC stressed that some of the new
> gTLD applications that are intended for communities and have wide public
> support were not submitted as community applications; those applications
> are currently in contention with others not designed for the benefit of
> specific communities and driven purely by commercial considerations. In
> this regard the European Commission (consistent with its position in the
> GAC) fully endorses the GAC view that community applications and
> applications with community support should be given preferential
> treatment in the new gTLD string contention resolution process, and
> remind the clear above mentioned GAC Beijing and Durban Communiques.
>
>
>
> *4.       **Security and consumer protection *
>
> Security and consumer protection are fundamental public policy
> objectives. Therefore we endorse those comments proposing that the
> winning applicant is contractually required to ensure that all security
> related gTLDs adopt technologies that improve the level of trust of
> Internet users. A "secure" gTLD implies that the resources offered are
> truly secure and operating under specific policies that warrant a
> dedicated level of security to end users. It is therefore contrary to
> this public policy interest that the winning applicant is decided
> through an auction process that may simply favour deep pocket applications.
>
>
>
> Therefore we will repeat again our concern about the negative impact
> that auctions may have for the preservation and enhancement of the
> operational stability, reliability, security and global interoperability
> of the Internet, as expressed during the Buenos Aires GAC meeting: "The
> European Commission believes that in the new gTLD program, ICANN should
> aim not just to maintain, but also enhance the level of consumer
> protection and confidence in gTLDs. ICANN should therefore take this
> social and community responsibility into account in their implementation
> plan. It is our understanding that trusted domains such as .safe,
> .secure and .security risks being awarded to applicants based only upon
> the price they are willing to pay in an auction. We therefore urge
> ICANN, in the interest of fostering innovative solutions that enhance
> global security, not to allow purely commercial interests to prevail in
> the delegation of these domains.
>
>
>
> *5.       **Negotiations between applicants prior to the Auction process*
>
>
>
> Over and above, there seems not to be any incentive for financially
> strong applicants to solve the contention "through voluntary agreement
> among the involved applicants". This solution places an unnecessary
> burden on applicants and departs from the artificial assumption that
> parties are eager to negotiate.
>
>
>
> *6.       **Destination (use) of Auction funds*
>
> We also note the lack of clarity as regards the destination of the
> significant funds that ICANN will receive as a result of these auctions;
> it is therefore highly recommended that ICANN begins a consultation
> process with the community to determine the allocation of the funds
> gathered through this process, with a focus on its use for community
> support, capacity building and engagement of stakeholders in least
> developed nations.
>
>
>
> *7.       **Unilateral powers to modify Auction Rules*
>
>
>
> ICANN shall not be entitled in its sole discretion to amend these
> Auction Rules "for any auction at any time and for any reason prior to
> the deposit deadline for that auction". The abovementioned unilateral
> power to change the rules currently under negotiation only contributes
> to increase applicants' uncertainty. The European Commission fully
> supports that "Any proposed changes, at a minimum, should be announced
> publicly at least 30 days in advance of any auction, and should be for
> good cause based on exigent circumstances".
>
>
>
> We are confident that community input received will allow ICANN to amend
> the current draft Auction Rules (version 2013.12.12) in a manner
> consistent with ICANN's objectives and fully rooted in the principle of
> fairness.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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)



More information about the ALAC mailing list