[At-Large] [GTLD-WG] Amazon, Google And Others Going After Generics

[Carlton Samuels]

+++1.
- Carlton

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


On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Evan Leibovitch
<evanleibovitch at gmail.com>wrote:

> The results indicate one or more of a couple of causes, depending on
> perspective:
>
> - The ICANN publicity campaign for applicant support was so utterly
> pathetic, that only people already close to the process understood enough
> to take advantage of the opportunity;
>
> - It's official; ICANN is a rich world organization serving rich world
> players, and only plays lip service to a global scope. The applicant
> support program made for good optics, but ICANN had no interest in its
> actually working. That a handful of insiders were able to exploit, enables
> those inside the bubble to still pretend that ICANN has worldwide
> sensibilities.
>
> - Any claim that the bottom up process works, our that the public interest
> had a voice in ICANN, was definitively put to rest. This program was
> asserted on an unwilling Board, staff and industry by the public interest
> community, the first ever major policy initiative of this kind. So
> naturally, it never stood a chance.
>
> - There truly is no demand for gTLDs outside the ICANN bubble of
> speculators and name-protectors, along with a handful of internet
> infrastructure providers. Only insiders are deluded enough to perceive that
> ANY money given to ICANN is money well spent on improving access or
> development. Community organizers - especially the ones targeted for
> applicant support - would rather spend their limited funds locally. IOW
> ...  in the real world outside ICANN, gTLDs -- even subsidized -- are
> unnecessary vanity items that do not benefit providers or consumers of
> internet content and services.
>
> The first explanation indicates incompetent execution of ICANN's mandate.
> The second indicates an intolerable bias in interpreting the mandate. The
> third suggests a horrible breakdown in the governance of the mandate. And
> the fourth suggests that the mandate itself is fundamentally flawed.
>
> Take your pick. They're not mutually exclusive.
> On Jun 16, 2012 10:46 PM, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > The three support applications are particularly disappointing in
> > light of all three being from long-time ICANN participants.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > At 16/06/2012 01:15 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >Indeed, the outreach plan was a failure in so many respects, and
> > >people have been complaining about it for a while to no avail, even
> > >while there was still a chance to fix it. And we see the results: 17
> > >applications from Africa and 3 applicant support applications.  And
> > >while I was hopping that 10 - 20 of the applications would be from
> > >ASP applicants, I meant of the global total, not of the African total.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GTLD-WG mailing list
> > GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
> >
> > Working Group direct URL:
> > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
> >
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>
> Working Group direct URL:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
>