[EURO-Discuss] Proposed Euralo statement on the gTLD Applicant's guide

Wolf Ludwig wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net
Fri Jan 30 17:40:28 EST 2009


Dear Patrick and Bill,

I appreciate your way of consensus finding -- which is almost typically 
Swiss style ;-) I take this as an example of EURALO best practise and I am 
looking forward to more EURALO statements on ICANN issues like this.

Thanks for your work and
alle the best,
Wolf


Patrick Vande Walle wrote Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:34:
>I am fine with your proposed changes. Obviously your English drafting is
>better than mine ;-)  -Patrick
>
>On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:10:50 +0100, William Drake
><william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch> wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>> 
>> Thanks for clarifying the intention, the new first sentence seems apt  
>> (assuming this is in fact a strong majority view in Euralo, not many  
>> responses yet so I don't know).  I wonder though if maybe it might  
>> also be good to tweak a bit more, perhaps like,
>> 
>> "The EURALO does not support recent calls to delay the new gTLD process
>> until additional studies are performed. We are particularly concerned  
>> about
>> any delay to the introduction of IDN TLDs, both generic and country  
>> code,
>> and strongly oppose any further barriers to their introduction. At the  
>> same time,
>> we believe that ICANN needs to carefully examine and address the  
>> public interest concerns
>> raised by ALAC and others. We very much hope that these can be fully  
>> addressed
>> without slowing down dramatically the ongoing process."
>> 
>> Reasons:
>> 
>> *We believe that is stronger than we understand, which sounds like a  
>> concession to an unfortunate condition
>> 
>> *Saying that ICANN needs respond to the concerns raised in the  
>> numerous comments submitted is pretty broad, and not all the comments  
>> are consistent with ALAC's concerns.  For present purposes, wouldn't  
>> it be better to specify that we are asking that it's the public  
>> interest concerns of ALAC and others be addressed? (since I have one  
>> foot here and one in NCUC, which has written a pretty thorough  
>> critique of the process, I'd have rather said NCUC than "others," but  
>> someone here wouldn't prefer that...?)
>> 
>> *Saying "we are convinced" it can be done seems a leap of faith, I'd  
>> rather express a hope.  And "fully addressed" seems stronger than  
>> "dealt with."  One could "deal with" concerns by briefly mentioning  
>> and dismissing them.
>> 
>> Just copy editing suggestions, I'll roll with whichever version has  
>> strong support in the group.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> On Jan 30, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> Bill and all,
>>>
>>> Yes, it may seem contradictory to suggest lot of changes and at the  
>>> same
>>> time express concern about possible delays.
>>> Actually, I think the European concern is more directed towards some  
>>> North
>>> American calls to drop the process entirely or suspend it until a  
>>> series of
>>> long studies are performed on the relevance to the market of the  
>>> whole new
>>> gTLD process.
>>>
>>> I suggest an amendment to the text that would read:
>>>
>>> "The EURALO does not support recent calls to delay the new gTLD  
>>> process
>>> until additional studies are performed. We are particularly  
>>> concerned about
>>> any delay to the introduction of IDN TLDs, both generic and country  
>>> code,
>>> and strongly oppose any further barriers to their introduction. We
>>> understand that ICANN needs to carefully examine and address concerns
>>> raised in the numerous comments that were submitted. However, we are
>>> convinced they can be dealt with without slowing down dramatically the
>>> ongoing process."
>>>
>>> To reply to Annette: I had a discussion with some NARALO members,  
>>> and they
>>> disagree about the "no further delay" paragraph. Hence, I expect the  
>>> common
>>> ALAC statement to be silent about that.
>>>
>>> The full Euralo statement is here:
>>>
>https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_additional_statement_regarding_the_first_draft_of_the_applicant_guidebook_and_associated_document
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:34:47 +0100, William Drake
>>> <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to Patrick, Adam and others for pushing this forward.
>>>> Appending regional comments to the ALAC statement seems like a good
>>>> idea.  I wonder though about the key sentence, "EURALO does not
>>>> support recent calls for a delay to the new gTLD process."  I'm not
>>>> clear on how this conclusion fits with the laundry list of concerns
>>>> raised in both the EURALO and ALAC texts.  Together, they say we want
>>>> ICANN to rethink registry/registrar separations; amend the guide's
>>>> requirements regarding the use of registrars; have a different
>>>> approval process for geographical, community bounded, non-commercial,
>>>> not-for-profit gTLDs; change the one-size-fits all fee structure;
>>>> improve compliance processes; build in public interest oriented
>>>> mechanisms; get rid of MAPO objections; drop ICC arbitration; change
>>>> the number of applications contemplated in the first round; and
>>>> develop a comprehensive resourcing plan for the new gTLD program.   
>>>> How
>>>> could addressing all these concerns not involve delays in the
>>>> process?  Can we really have it both ways?  Would we be happy if the
>>>> board cited the "no delays" headline conclusion as support for moving
>>>> forward, but then didn't address fully the concerns raised?  Is  
>>>> that a
>>>> far-fetched scenario?
>> 
>> ***********************************************************
>> William J. Drake
>> Senior Associate
>> Centre for International Governance
>> Graduate Institute of International and
>>    Development Studies
>> Geneva, Switzerland
>> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
>> New book: Governing Global Electronic Networks,
>> http://tinyurl.com/5mh9jj
>> ***********************************************************
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>EURO-Discuss mailing list
>EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>

comunica-ch
phone +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig
www.comunica-ch.net

Digitale Allemd
http://blog.allmend.ch -

EURALO
https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_icann_at_large_europe




More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list