[At-Large] Updates to New gTLD Program Implementation and auctioning model.

[Alan Greenberg]

Patrick and Hong, I find your comments a strong over-reaction.

The issue that is being discussed is how to handle the situation of 
multiple people applying for the same TLD, and they cannot come to an 
agreement amongst themselves. Classic examples are ".web" and ".mail" 
but there are plenty of other examples.

The paper discusses the various ways of addressing such conflicts, 
and comes to the conclusion that auctions are probably the preferable 
path. If you disagree with this, that is fine. The only seeming 
practical alternative is a subjective analysis of which is the best 
for the overall good of the Internet or the communities or whatever 
(the so-called beauty contest). I find that alternative far too 
fraught with potential problems, but if that is what you favour, it 
would be interesting to hear how you think it can be done properly.

Using an auction to resolve the conflict does indeed mean that .web 
will not likely go to a small not-for-profit organization. If that is 
your concern, then in my mind, you are being somewhat unrealistic.

On the positive side, the possible auctions of these relatively few 
high-profile TLDs will likely bring in a LOT of money. It has 
repeatedly been suggested that this wind-fall profit not be simply 
wrapped into ICANN general funds, or even used to offset the costs of 
offering new gTLDs. But rather it be used to (with appropriate 
caution) make it less expensive and less onerous for not-for-profits, 
cultural communities and developing countries folks to acquire new gTLDs.

Now THAT is something that I think At-Large should make a strong 
statement about.

Alan


At 09/08/2008 06:03 PM, Hong Xue wrote:
>Thanks for drawing our attention on this paper. Given that the new gTLD
>process embraces the IDN TLDs, the paper presents a very surprising, or
>shocking view, on allocation of TLDs. If the paper is primarily on the
>economic consideration, I wonder if the ICANN has any other consideration,
>such as protecting cultural diversity and bridging digital divide, on
>selection of new gTLDs (IDN gTLDs). As a governing body of a critical
>Internet resources, ICANN should envisage the values that are more important
>and fundamental than the highest bidding amount. I echo what has been
>precisely stated by Vittorio:
>
>Another wrong assumption is that monetary value is the only quantity that
>counts.In fact, personally I think that the "value" of a TLD is mostly
>connected to other factors. For example, one is how many final users of the
>Internet will ever use services located inside that TLD; another one is how
>strongly these people will feel attached to that TLD, i.e. whether the TLD
>contributes to build any kind of "community identity" for an online group of
>people that presently does not have it; a third one is whether the new TLD
>will spawn innovative uses of the DNS or enable innovative services. None of
>these is directly connected to monetary value, and it is quite disturbing to
>me that an organization like ICANN, which is meant to steward scarce global
>public resources in the interest of the entire community of the Internet,
>still seems to have such a partial and narrow view of where the value of the
>Internet itself lies.
>Hong
>
>
>
>
>On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu
> > wrote:
>
> > http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-08aug08-en.htm
> >
> > ICANN has published a paper from its contractor PowerAuctions LLC,
> > regarding the use of auctions to award new TLD strings in case of
> > contention.
> >
> > http://icann.org/en/topics/economic-case-auctions-08aug08-en.pdf
> >
> > I think it would be important that the At Large speaks up. The model
> > proposed in the document is a purely capitalistic one. It is based on
> > the assumption that all gTLDs are created to make as much money as
> > possible. Smaller, community based TLDs seem quite difficult to launch
> > in such context.
> >
> > The mere possibility of auctions will actually generate contention on
> > some strings. The little guys wishing to establish a not-for-profit TLD
> >  will be outplayed by the wealthy ones.
> >
> > A public forum has been established at
> > http://forum.icann.org/lists/auction-consultation/.
> > Comments to auction-consultation at icann.org before 8 September 2008.
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Vande Walle
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > At-Large mailing list
> > At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> > 
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> >
>_______________________________________________
>At-Large mailing list
>At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org