[NA-Discuss] IMPORTANT: US Senate hearings on new gTLDs
Garth Bruen at Knujon.com
gbruen at knujon.com
Fri Dec 9 00:21:34 UTC 2011
Beau - Kurt did cite the multi-stakeholder model, unfortunately the way he
cited it made is sound as if all the constituent groups were 100% on board
with the way things are going, glossing over various concerns, questions,
and protests. -Garth
From: "Beau Brendler" <beaubrendler at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 5:24 PM
To: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele at blacknight.ie>; "Evan
Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org>
Cc: "NARALO Discussion List" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] IMPORTANT: US Senate hearings on new gTLDs
> I've done it before -- you have to be invited. If you are not a US citizen
> you can refuse if called. However the issue is getting the message heard.
> Hearings are tightly scripted and you don't just get the chance to get up
> and make a statement, it's not like an ICANN free for all.
> I agree that we should make a statement, and would be happy to author one
> for NARALO, providing we can actually come to a rough consensus as to what
> to say. Not everyone agrees with the current sentiment against new gTLDs.
> That said, if we can create a statement with consensus, since we are a
> part of ICANN, we could, I should think, compel ICANN's lobbyist (whoever
> their VP of government affairs is now) to present the statement on our
> behalf, even if it goes against ICANN's party line.
> The other question to ask is, did Kurt do his due multi-stakeholder
> diligence and actually ask what policy position(s) should be presented?
> Did Olivier know anything about this in advance and was he consulted? One
> would think that the U.S. Congress would be interested in what the
> end-user community might think...
> All that said, we could probably also submit a statement that would be
> taken seriously via John D. Rockefeller's office. I have, shall we say,
> discussed consumer issues with them before.
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele at blacknight.ie>
>>Sent: Dec 8, 2011 3:37 PM
>>To: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
>>Cc: NARALO Discussion List <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] IMPORTANT: US Senate hearings on new gTLDs
>>They've had non-US witnesses at past hearings if my memory serves me
>>Mr. Michele Neylon
>>Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity
>>On 8 Dec 2011, at 14:59, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org> wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> This morning, the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
>>> Transportation held a hearing on the ICANN new gTLD program.
>>> The web page describing the hearing, which includes a video of the
>>> 90-minute session, is at http://1.usa.gov/vzddPH
>>> I am told that it will soon be uploaded to the Committee's YouTube
>>> at http://www.youtube.com/user/SenateCommercePress
>>> Among the speakers are
>>> - Kurt Pritz, ICANN VP
>>> - Dan Jaffe of the Association of National Advertisers who is trying
>>> block the new gTLD program
>>> - Fiona Alexander with the US NTIA
>>> - Angela Williams of the US YMCA (speaking after deliberation with
>>> ICANN's Non-Profit Organization Constituency)
>>> - Esther Dyson, former ICANN Board member (and ALAC member from the
>>> pre-RALO days when ALAC was all-appointed)
>>> It's VERY interesting listening. Kurt's message -- that adequate
>>> protections are in place in the program to deter large amounts of money
>>> spent on defensive registrations -- was not well received. In contrast,
>>> committee heard about several instances -- in some cases by the Senators
>>> themselves -- who were the victims of cybersquatting and domain
>>> speculators. All other speakers were critical of the program and some
>>> even asking if the US government has the authority to block the roll-out
>>> from happening in January as ICANN intends.
>>> Interesting note amongst the comments... many orgs have found themselves
>>> needing to but defencive registrations in .XXX and are livid at the
>>> of having to do a bunch more for future TLDs. (For instance, Indiana
>>> University has purchased "hoosiers.xxx").
>>> Of note to us.... much was made by Kurt of the consensus between
>>> stakeholders. Dan shot that down in relation to business users and
>>> said the NPOC wasn't allowed to become a real stakeholder in time to
>>> an impact on decisions already made. Esther made mention at the end that
>>> the real constituency not yet heard from (at least by the Senators) was
>>> billions of Internet end users. Mention was made that the committee now
>>> needs to hear from them.
>>> Sounds like an opportunity to me.
>>> Now... I don't know if one has to be a US citizen to testify; if not the
>>> ICANN Chair or vice chairs (of which I am one) would all be good
>>> and in fact the international character of ALAC sends a useful message
>>> But if the requirement is to be a US resident, I have complete and utter
>>> faith that NARALO's own leadership includes people (Beau, Ganesh,
>>> who could easily step into the role and do the community proud.
>>> Further to this, I would like to raise the issue as an agenda item on
>>> Monday's NARALO call and I would like us to consider letting the
>>> know that there is indeed a group within ICANN that exists to provide
>>> voice of Internet end-users,
>>> Thank you.
>>> - Evan
>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>>NA-Discuss mailing list
>>NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
More information about the NA-Discuss