[ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion

Mon Apr 3 20:40:30 UTC 2017

 I understand Barrack, but the requested measure is general. So it is not an investment, it is an expense.
 ICANN would pay to explain something whose results benefit those who make more money from it.
If instead of that, do we allocate that same amount to lowering prices in our poor regions, where the prices of domains are the same as in very rich areas? That would be an investment.

Also my humble opinion and respect

Best

Alberto

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Barrack Otieno [mailto:otieno.barrack at gmail.com] 
Enviado el: Monday, April 3, 2017 5:19 PM
Para: Alberto Soto <asoto at ibero-americano.org>
CC: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>; Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>; ALAC Working List <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Asunto: Re: [ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion

Hi Alberto,

I read a certain book on the history of the Domain Name Industry by PIR, it seems the issue of dealing with surpluses is as old as the industry itself. Looking at the amount of money spent on  the transition, it equally makes sense to invest good money in awareness creation and capacity building which in effect will expand the global domain name footprint. Currently the global North and Europe  accounts for more than 50 % of domain name registrations, surely this is not one world one internet, we can do better as stakeholders.

My humble opinion though

Regards

On 4/3/17, Alberto Soto <asoto at ibero-americano.org> wrote:
> That is, with the excuse that ICANN should promote universal awareness 
> of new gTLDs, should it spend (not invest !!) that money?
>
>
>
> I do not agree, but I do agree with Seun.
>
>
>
> Regards!
>
>
>
> Alberto
>
>
>
> De: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Seun 
> Ojedeji Enviado el: Monday, April 3, 2017 4:46 PM
> Para: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
> CC: ALAC Working List <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Asunto: Re: [ALAC] Fwd: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion
>
>
>
> Indeed! One wonders how ICANN which supposed to be a neutral entity 
> would start marketing "dying" newgtld at the expense of other tlds 
> (legacy TLD and ccTLD).
>
>
>
> Hopefully ICANN will not take this seriously, but i have been 
> disappointed in the past hence this may just be one of such instances.
>
>
>
> Imagine an ISP asking ICANN or RIR to help them market for customers 
> so they can pay their membership dues for IP resource allocated to them!
>
>
>
> The world is really changing!!!
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> On 3 Apr 2017 20:29, "Carlton Samuels" <carlton.samuels at gmail.com 
> <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> As the world turns........
>
>
> ==============================
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround 
> =============================
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com <mailto:kurt at kjpritz.com> >
> Date: Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 5:16 PM
> Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] Domain Name Promotion
> To: Jeff Neuman <jeff.neuman at comlaude.com 
> <mailto:jeff.neuman at comlaude.com>
>>, avri at apc.org <mailto:avri at apc.org>
> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> "
> <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org> >
>
>
>
> Hi Jeff, Avri, et al:
>
>
>
> I saw that this has been published.
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/diaz-to-atallah-e
> t-al-14mar17-en.pdf
>
>
>
> The reason I am writing is in reference to the proposal that: “ICANN 
> create a fund, to be seeded with US$3M at start-up, to promote 
> universal awareness of new gTLDs to the general Internet user 
> community, and universal acceptance of new gTLDs across the Internet.”
>
>
>
> In the past, when ICANN staff members have been asked in public fora 
> to begin an effort to promote the use of domain names, the response 
> has generally been that it is not ICANN’s role to promote the use of 
> domain names and domain name registries.
>
>
>
> To me, this is not an operations question; this is a policy question.
>
>
>
> In the current environment, i.e., absent a policy statement, ICANN can 
> easily proceed to take up the RySG recommendation, especially for this 
> relatively small seed fund. I hope we all urge that ICANN do this.
>
>
>
> However, if ICANN hesitates to take up an awareness campaign regarding 
> the benefits of domain names (Including how they can be used and their 
> efficacy as a strategic tool), then a policy statement could direct such an action.
>
>
>
> ICANN is for two things, the allocation of domain names and IP addresses.
> Who else is to inform the largely ignorant public on the utility of 
> domain names if not ICANN?
>
>
>
> All of us argued about how best to introduce and govern domain name 
> usage - but we are all in favor of domain name uptake and the safe and 
> stable growth of the domain name industry. All of us show up at ICANN 
> meetings to talk about the best way to delegate and register names. If 
> we and ICANN are not for their usage - why be part of this?
>
>
>
> Some of us were against the new gTLD program and others were not happy 
> with the final policy or implementation. Does that mean they want to 
> see the program fail? Of course not. The new gTLD program is the 
> culmination of many years and many thousand people-hours of work.
>
>
>
> With tools and resources for promoting public understanding of domain 
> names readily available, I don’t see how ICANN (the staff or the 
> community) can sit idly by.  With the cash surplus in hand, as Patton 
> said, “we are at the right time in the right place with the right 
> instrument,” to do something to fortify the domain name system and industry.
>
>
>
> During the slow process of launching new TLDs, search, apps and social 
> media became strong competition for domain name adoption. It is time 
> for us champions of domain names to use the tools at our disposal, 
> including a small portion of that excess application fee cash, to 
> create public awareness about the domain name industry that we have created.
>
>
>
> My recommendation is that this PDP working group should form a team to 
> consider this issue and make a separate recommendation to the GNSO 
> Council in a timely manner. A separate team is justifiable because 
> this effects the previous as well as the next round. I also think the 
> current PDP working group can be more nimble as compared to the effort 
> necessary to start a new policy discussion.
>
>
>
> That recommendation could simply be a statement that it is  the role 
> of ICANN to promote awareness of domain names and the benefits of 
> competition and choice in the domain name industry.
>
>
>
> We can show that we can act.
>
>
>
> Kurt
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________
>
> Kurt Pritz
>
> kurt at kjpritz.com <mailto:kurt at kjpritz.com>
>
> +1.310.400.4184 <tel:(310)%20400-4184>
>
> Skype: kjpritz
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <mailto:Gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: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+Committe
> e+(ALAC)
>
>

--
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A