[At-Large] A workable, gTLDs process, now

[Christopher Wilkinson]

Good evening:

As I understand it there will be an important meeting early next week  
in Brussels which may influence what ICANN does with the new gTLD  
process.
For those of you who will be present, I would recommend the following  
line:

1.	To disaggregate the process. First, to give priority to the IDN  
applications. Secondly to separate the public interest, linguistic/ 
cultural and geographical/city proposals from all the rest.
	Thirdly to address the <.brand> issues as an entirely distinct  
process where, with WIPO, the related competition and trademark issues  
can be considered; i.e. postpone.
	Fourth, to address the <.generic> proposals: these may be supported  
provided that they are associated with a rigorous registration policy,  
subject to public consultation. i.e. not to postpone, but they will  
take longer.

2.	Regarding Vertical Integration, I have seen nothing which would  
lead me to amend the posting which I made last August, and which for  
some reason has not been cited in any of the ICANN Briefing Papers:
	
	http://forum.icann.org/lists/vi-pdp-initial-report/pdfFZQIl7H2Er.pdf

	In short, the attempt last year within GNSO to associate the new gTLD  
process with backward integration between Registrars and Registries  
has (a) caused a breakdown in the bottom-up consensus process (b) been  
a cause of further delay and (c) flies in the face of ICANN's mandate  
as the custodian of competition policy in the DNS. No.

I shall post this message to the Lists with which I am associated:	At  
Large, Governance, ISOC.

With regards to you all,

CW