[ALAC] Letter from Steve Crocker to GAC Chair regarding GNSO/GAC role in gTLD policy development

[Evan Leibovitch]

"Dear governments of the world,

Thank you for your interest in ICANN. Your advice is always welcome, when
it is in agreement with our industry compact between domain buyers and
sellers.

However, even when the public interest, international treaty and global
governmental consensus rarely converge to assert an issue, the
aforementioned industry compact is still owed the right to delay, dilute
and (should it wish) destroy such initiative within our internal
procedures. This is what we call 'multi-stakeholderism'.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Sincerely, ICANN."

Opposing the protection of Red Cross names is simply indefensible outside
the ICANN bubble. It makes ICANN a justifiable target of ridicule ... and
disruption.

The GAC has already made reasonable compromise, backing away from asserting
Olympic and NGO name protection that did not have as much public interest
rationale or support. What remains is an easily understood, common sense
request that ICANN cannot brush aside without consequence.

ICANN's implementation of multi stakeholder processes deliberately designed
a system in which the industry makes policy, and the public interest
(through the GAC and ALAC) "advise" after the fact. Slow change has
happened, but in many respects (such as the current round of gTLDs), the
damage has been done and the only actions left are remedial rather than
prevention.

And even those remedial efforts are severely impeded, as At Large has seen
first hand; our objection processes and Applicant Support initiatives have
clearly failed, despite the community's best good-faith efforts.

The ALAC has a clear and critical interest in supporting the GAC in this
matter.