[At-Large] Auction Proceeds - where we are and what you can help

Kan Kaili kankaili at gmail.com
Sat May 13 05:05:22 UTC 2017


Besides all the suggestions for fund usage, I would suggest another way to "use" the money.  That is, to REFUND all the applicants who paid for applying new gTLDs.

If I remember correctly, ICANN collected USD $175K per application, and recognized as a hefty price to pay even by ICANN itself.  This could be a threshold that prevented some or many potential applications.

Thus, to proportionally refund the applicants would be one of the fairest way to "get rid of" the "extra" funds collected.

Meanwhile, in relation to ICANN's mission, I do not agree anyway to spend this money for the "awareness" or marketing of the new gTLD program, or of ICANN itself.

Thank you.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Evan Leibovitch 
  To: ICANN At-Large list 
  Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 6:55 AM
  Subject: Re: [At-Large] Auction Proceeds - where we are and what you can help

  I'm not sure that there's really a disagreement between Ken and John.

  Informing the world of the function of the DNS -- and of ICANN's crucial role in that piece of infrastructure -- is both within scope and of high value. There are ways that this can be deployed in ways that don't constitute vanity and self-aggrandizing.


  Personally I'm a little surprised and disappointed by the fact nobody in this list, especially my civil society colleagues, are advocating use of auction proceeds to seed an ongoing endowment for the IGF. There are many important parts of Internet governance, but ICANN is the only one of them that attracts so much money and speculative/entrepreneurial behavior. ICANN could almost overnight render itself one of the global heroes of the Internet ecosystem if it provided ongoing support of other related bits such that the IGF could maintain vitality and independence.

  Furthermore, it is in ICANN's selfish best interest to promote multi-stakeholderism throughout the universe of IG. If government multilateral activity can successfully encroach on the ecosystem due to weakness/failure of the IGF, then ICANN will surely be a target next.

  Just a thought. If ALAC got behind this and the idea gained broad support, ICANN will find a way to define such action to be within scope.

  (Disclosure: I have never even attended an IGF, so I am hardly acting in a self-serving manner in proposing this endowment. One doesn't have to be in the IGF to see its value.)

  - Evan


  At-Large mailing list
  At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org

  At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20170513/44b98b32/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list