<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体>Talking about the new gTLD program, I remember
attending the 2011 ICANN 41 in Singapore. As I remember, that time George
Sadowski was the only Board member who voted against it. Maybe some of his
opinions, as well as records of the debate, could shed some light for new comers
like me to better understand the issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体>I just wonder where I can find this. Anybody can
help? </FONT><FONT size=2 face=宋体>Thank you.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体>Kaili Kan</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=宋体></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=carlton.samuels@gmail.com
href="mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com">Carlton Samuels</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体"><B>To:</B> <A title=ocl@gih.com
href="mailto:ocl@gih.com">Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=johnl@iecc.com
href="mailto:johnl@iecc.com">John R. Levine</A> ; <A
title=at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
href="mailto:at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org">At-Large Worldwide</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, December 19, 2015 10:14
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 9pt 宋体"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [At-Large] Fwd: [council] Final
Issue Report on New gTLD Subsequent Procedures</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: comic sans ms,sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: large"
class=gmail_default>I can attest to all that Olivier has recorded here.
Our colleague Evan Leibovitch, as penholder on the ALAC statement on PAG had a
greater task keeping us focused on the priority topics than finding grist for
what was wrong with the details of the program, at least from our
perspective. </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: comic sans ms,sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: large"
class=gmail_default><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: comic sans ms,sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: large"
class=gmail_default>We were the first to call the Morality and Public Order
clause odious and an assault on common sense. And despite the severe
criticism the ALAC, to its credit, did not back off our interest in the
Applicant Support initiative. This never met expectations. But at least we
were in the fight. We should be proud of the body of work from the ALAC in
that period.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: comic sans ms,sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: large"
class=gmail_default><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: comic sans ms,sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: large"
class=gmail_default>-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 Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Olivier MJ
Crepin-Leblond <SPAN dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:ocl@gih.com"
target=_blank>ocl@gih.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Dear Christopher,<BR><BR>sorry I am only picking this up
now - it was filed in the wrong folder.<BR>My comments
below:<BR><SPAN><BR>On 09/12/2015 20:08, Christopher Wilkinson
wrote:<BR>> Hmmm … following a brief read (there are 160 pp.), it would
appear:<BR>><BR>> 1. That there was no attempt to update
the 2010 economic studies, which were considered to be
adequate.<BR><BR></SPAN>The economic study (which can be found at<BR><A
href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2010-12-03-en" rel=noreferrer
target=_blank>https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2010-12-03-en</A> )
was published in<BR>two parts, such was the pressure on ICANN to be able to
tick the<BR>"economic study" box that had been set along the path to
launching the<BR>new gTLD process. From memory, a public consultation on
these reports<BR>was never launched. The only ALAC comment relating to the
Applicant<BR>Guidebook & the new gTLD program was here:<BR><A
href="http://atlarge.icann.org/correspondence/statement-agbv5-08dec10-en.pdf"
rel=noreferrer
target=_blank>http://atlarge.icann.org/correspondence/statement-agbv5-08dec10-en.pdf</A><BR>As
you can see, the ALAC was not happy about a number of things which<BR>then
came back to bite ICANN later on. "told you so"<BR>In the meantime, read the
economic study and you'll see how naive and<BR>rushed it
is.<BR><SPAN><BR>><BR>> 2. There is one reference to an
opinion that the demand for new gTLDs was 'illusory'. Not clear whether this
refers to the demand from Registries or from
Registrants.<BR><BR></SPAN>There was a demand for new gTLDs from potential
applicants. Some<BR>applicants had already "sold" their program to investors
and clients. I<BR>have strong memories of the ICANN public forum having
scores of people<BR>queueing up asking the Board to give the new gTLD
program the go ahead,<BR>and that the applicant guidebook was good enough to
be signed off. The<BR>ALAC view, as you can see from above, was that it
wasn't ready. That<BR>introduced some tension all around, with some people
accusing the ALAC<BR>that it was against new gTLDs and that this position
was counter to<BR>Internet end users out there who couldn't register domain
names in an<BR>already crowded space. The ALAC stood by its position but was
completely<BR>ignored. Moreover you'll note that there's a complete fumble
on ICANN's<BR>part with regards to Registrant Rights & Responsibilities
with a botched<BR>"Registrant Benefits" part and "Registrant Rights"
sub-part. Anyway ---<BR>very poor follow-up on this on ICANN's
part.<BR><BR>As a result, I am shedding no tears for any failed new gTLD. I
am sorry<BR>for the end users that are going to be affected and I think that
the<BR>ALAC needs to watch this very closely, to make sure end users who
have<BR>registered domains in new gTLDs are treated well. The ALAC's
relevant<BR>working groups should keep a watch over that. Unfortunately the
most<BR>active participants are already flat out on ICANN Accountability
& other<BR>things, but the WGs would benefit from sharp eyes &
tongues.<BR><SPAN><BR>><BR>> 3. There are several
references to the financial evaluation of the applicants. However, one may
wonder what that consisted of as applied to 800+ applicants (and still
counting).<BR>> I would have to ask how many
qualified financial analysts would have been required to do a serious job on
so many applications in such a short period of time.<BR>>
In my time it was called risk analysis; nowadays it is called
'stress tests'.<BR>><BR>> The gist of the report seems to be to
recommend a massive new PDP to review and propose what to do next. Every
conceivable topic is included, except the economics of the DNS markets and
the financial position of the Registries. Perhaps some prioritisation is
called for.<BR><BR></SPAN>At-Large participants will need to be part of that
PDP. Expect it to<BR>start soon as once again there are forces out there
that want another<BR>application round of Ponz... I mean new gTLDs to start
as soon as possible.<BR>Kindest regards,<BR><BR>Olivier<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>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>At-Large mailing
list<BR>At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org<BR>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large<BR><BR>At-Large
Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>