[At-Large] [GTLD-WG] ALAC New gTLD statement

[Brendler, Beau]

So, perhaps, create a sort of case-by-case evaluation basis for those gTLDs who have been in the race for a while, but at the same time, halt the overall procedure so that the cited concerns can be addressed?

-----Original Message-----
From: at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Sébastien Bachollet
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 1:56 PM
To: gtld-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Cc: 'At-Large Staff'; 'At-Large Worldwide'
Subject: Re: [At-Large] [GTLD-WG] ALAC New gTLD statement

Thanks Beau for your push on that subject.
I would like to add one idea:
With less staff and less money Icann was able to introduce 7 and then 6 new gTLDs.
Maybe a more pragmatic way could be explored.
Thanks

Sébastien Bachollet
Président Isoc France
sebastien.bachollet at isoc.fr
www.egeni.org
www.isoc.fr



> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:gtld-wg-
> bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Brendler, Beau Envoyé :
> vendredi 9 janvier 2009 18:22 À : At-Large Worldwide;
> gtld-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc : Matthias; Heidi Ullrich; At-Large
> Staff; NA Discuss Objet : [GTLD-WG] ALAC New gTLD statement
>
> We need to make a statement of some sort -- it may already be too
> late, though my guess is that the rather unenthusiastic reception
> ICANN has received so far makes the concern less acute. That said, our
> deadline has come and gone.
>
> May I ask for guidance from staff to coordinate? And as for process?
> Are we to put the statement as written up for a vote? Or make it
> simple and just send up a line of advice to the board (we can cite the
> other documents as a backup rationale)?
>
> Something like this (adopting from some of the language I have seen in
> reviewing recent notes, mostly from John):
>
> The ALAC recommends that the ICANN board delay the new gTLD
> application and implementation process until the following steps are taken:
>
> * The economic impact study promised in 2006 has been released and
> evaluated.
> * ICANN develops and implements compliance processes to manage all
> requirements in existing registry and registrar contracts.
> * ICANN develops compliance processes for any new or different
> requirements in new contracts.
> * That IDN gTLDs and IDN ccTLDs be delayed as well until similar
> issues regarding contract compliance are clearly addressed and
> disseminated to the user community.
> * That ICANN evaluates user community concerns with specific details
> contained in the new gTLD applicant guidebook, to be conveyed in a
> separate communication to the ICANN board, and provides a timely
> response to them.
>
> May I suggest to the ALAC ex com or whomever the appropriate authority
> is, to put this statement up for a vote from the ALAC as soon as
> possible?
>
> Beau Brendler
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-
> bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 9:37 AM
> To: At-Large Worldwide
> Subject: [At-Large] my submissions to new gTLD statement
>
> Re:  "By asking to suspend the process, we risk killing innovation and
> we play the game of the incumbents."
>
> Patrick, as you have been spearheading the launch of the .sport TLD,
> your views are necessarily tainted with a conflict of interest.
>
> Yes, money is risked when processes are delayed.  Stuart Lawley's .xxx
> initiative risked millions, and many of us recall the folks at SITA
> going up to the microphone session after session, year after year
> while burning up money.
>
> But we are not in the business of protecting potential TLD operators;
> we are in the business of acting in the public interest.
>
> The new gTLD process must be stopped dead in its tracks and must be
> significantly re-worked to address the issues raised (and yes, this
> could take years, many years).  While there is a risk to potential new
> registry operators, the risk to the public of the consequences of a
> poorly designed and implemented launch cycle are substantially worse.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> ***
> Scanned
>
> **
> This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s)
> named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any
> attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not
> the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute
> or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all
> or any part of its contents.  If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and
> permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer
> system.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg_atlarge-
> lists.icann.org
>
> Working Group direct URL: https://st.icann.org/gnso-
> liaison/index.cgi?new_gtld_policy


_______________________________________________
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

***
Scanned

**
This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.