[At-Large] IGO names: is this worth war?
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Wed Nov 2 10:43:29 UTC 2016
On 02/11/2016 14:48, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
> I doubt that GAC is really saying it will take off to ITU. (What GAC
> thinks is high level concern may well not coincide with what ITU does
> and that disparity remains a barrier). But it is showing the prisoner
> the implements of torture in advance.
I should have perhaps completed my sentence: the GAC Chair is raising
the Damocles sword... yet this sword is not his. The GAC itself is a
vehicle created by ICANN, so it won't leave. GAC membership has grown
steadily until now. The concern is that it starts losing members and
that these members go to ITU instead. Imagine a boycott of GAC by a
number of countries. Imagine a walk-out. Has anyone ever considered this?
My point is that you need to keep GAC *members* happy or they'll take
their business elsewhere. During the IANA Stewardship transition we have
heard enough times that ICANN is a private sector led organisation. In
business terms, it means, keep your customers happy or they'll leave.
And that's only part of the equation: first they'll leave and then
they'll kill business by imposing licensing at national level.Some
people reading this might be saying "good! that will teach them!" but I
think that national licensing of the domain name industry will be the
beginning of the end for innovation on the Internet.
More information about the At-Large