<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">In a funny kinda way, Avri's position is the practical outcome. Save and except we should endeavour to add meaningful protections for the poor slobs caught in the net. Let me explain.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">We say we are for a free market. But those of us who would have been informed by practical experience know the market is not always a sage in operation. So we expect, at minimum, some baseline protections in place to mediate adverse consumer impact.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">Especially in instant case where the domain name market is and remains a privileged space, booted largely on mercantilist economic precepts; some vital resource is expropriated and a license is granted to exploit one corner of the market for this resource by paying an exclusionary license fee. Like it or not, there is a duty of care imposed on the one granting the license. And that duty devolves to minimizing harm from market interactions originating from the licensee. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">ICANN gives and ICANN receives. So we have in place data escrow and archiving concordats, registry failover processes and even commercial successor planning frameworks in place. All good. But not sufficient. For these are generally tacking moreso to the operational stability and reliability of the DNS, with consumer protection a poor second, if at all a thought. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">Sure, you simply cannot protect every consumer from every fool choice/action they freely take. But we expect some will be taken in blissful ignorance. So as the regulator, I feel ICANN is duty-bound to full disclosure and dissemination of all the relevant known caveats; kind of a master 'caveat emptor' if you will. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">-Carlton </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><br>==============================<br>Carlton A Samuels<br>Mobile: 876-818-1799<br><i><font color="#33CC00">Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround</font></i><br>=============================</div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
<br>
On 09-Dec-15 12:38, Christopher Wilkinson wrote:<br>
> <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20151204_security_firm_predicts_unprecedented_series_of_new_gtld_failures/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20151204_security_firm_predicts_unprecedented_series_of_new_gtld_failures/</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> Good evening. Did the WG see this coming?<br>
<br>
</span>The gTLD group that made the current set of recommendations (many of<br>
which were disregarded)?<br>
Yes, it did.<br>
And it realized that as with all products people come to rely on, some<br>
survive and some don't.<br>
This is the way it should be with products.<br>
<br>
I hated it when the store I bought most of my clothing came from shut<br>
down.<br>
But I am learning to cope with it. Found another store, in fact more<br>
than one.<br>
<br>
Likewise both people and even businesses can learn to cope.<br>
Web sites can be moved, what's the big deal as long as there is time to<br>
take care of it?<br>
<br>
The safe bet will still be an incumbent, those who can tolerate more<br>
risk will have greater choice.<br>
In time there will be other successful registries, especially those from<br>
the portfolio applicants who can afford to carry an unsuccessful name,<br>
and those will be added to the list of available names for people who<br>
cannot tolerate risk.<br>
<br>
I do not understand this wringing of hands over the fact that some of<br>
the flowers that bloom die. Everything is temporary, we should be used<br>
to it. And some of those names will be picked up by those registries<br>
who have a better idea for how to market them. I think EBERO was good<br>
idea to give TLDs that might be picked up a chance and to give people<br>
time to move if not. But expectations of eternal availability for TLDs<br>
seems silly to me.<br>
<br>
Do you think that guarantees should be available for any subsequent TLDs?<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
At-Large mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org">At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large</a><br>
<br>
At-Large Official Site: <a href="http://atlarge.icann.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://atlarge.icann.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>