Sounds like a good idea.

avri

On 11 Jan 2013, at 16:47, Wendy Seltzer wrote:

> Hi NCSG,
> 
> We dissented from this recommendation in Council, but were outvoted. Do
> we want to send a letter of our own to the Board?
> 
> Here was a letter I wrote to the drafting team, that we could repurpose
> for the Board:
> 
> I write because I continue to have strong disagreement with the "trust"
> metrics and their presentation. Since I have been unable to make the
> calls due to persistent scheduling conflicts, I wanted to spell out the
> concerns I discussed with several of you in Prague. I appreciate the
> work that has gone into the metrics, but believe that the "trust"
> metrics rely on a faulty premise, that gTLDs should be predictable,
> rather than open to innovative and unexpected new uses.
> 
> The current draft mistakes a platform, a gTLD, for an end-product. A key
> value of a platform is its generativity -- its ability to be used and
> leveraged by third parties for new, unexpected purposes. Precisely
> because much innovation is unanticipated, it cannot be predicted for a
> chart of measures. Moreover, incentives on the intermediaries to control
> their platforms translate into restrictions on end-users' free
> expression and innovation.
> 
> Just as we would not want to speak about "trust" in a pad of printing
> paper, on which anyone could make posters, and we don't ask a road
> system to interrogate what its drivers plan to do when they reach their
> destinations, I think we shouldn't judge DNS registries on their users'
> activities.
> 
> ICANN's planned reviews of and targets for gTLD success should not
> interfere with market decisions about the utility of various offerings.
> 
> In particular, I disagree with the second group of "trust" metrics, the
> " Measures related to confidence that TLD operators are fulfilling
> promises and complying with ICANN policies and applicable national
> laws:" namely,
> * Relative incidence of UDRP & URS Complaints; Relative incidence of
> UDRP & URS Decisions against registrant;
> * Quantity and relative incidence of intellectual property claims
> relating to Second Level domain names, and relative cost of overall
> domain name policing measured at: immediately prior to new gTLD
> delegation and at 1 and 3 years after delegation;
> * Quantity of Compliance Concerns w/r/t Applicable National Laws,
> including reported data security breaches;
> * Quantity and relative incidence of Domain Takedowns;
> * Quantity of spam received by a "honeypot" email address in each new gTLD;
> * Quantity and relative incidence of fraudulent transactions caused by
> phishing sites in new gTLDs;
> * Quantity and relative incidence of detected phishing sites using new
> gTLDs;
> * Quantity and relative incidence of detected botnets and malware using
> new gTLDs
> * Quantity and relative incidence of sites found to be dealing in or
> distributing identities and account information used in identity fraud; and
> * Quantity and relative incidence of complaints regarding inaccurate,
> invalid, or suspect WHOIS records in new gTLD
> 
> Separately, I disagree with the targets for the "redirection,"
> "duplicates," and "traffic" measures. All of these presume that the use
> for new gTLDs is to provide the same type of service to different
> parties, while some might be used to provide different services to
> parties including existing registrants.
> 
> Thanks,
> --Wendy
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [council] Advice requested by the ICANN Board
> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:33:05 -0000
> From: Jonathan Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Steve Crocker <[log in to unmask]>
> CC: <[log in to unmask]>, "Bill Graham" <[log in to unmask]>,
>    <[log in to unmask]>, "Bill Graham" <[log in to unmask]>,
>       "'Glen de Saint Géry'" <[log in to unmask]>,
> <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> Dear Steve,
> 
> 
> 
> Please see the attached regarding consumer trust, consumer choice and
> competition in the context of the domain name system per the 10 December
> 2010 ICANN board approved resolution (2010.12.10.06).
> 
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan Robinson
> 
> Chair
> 
> ICANN GNSO Council
> 
> 
> 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
> 
> skype: jonathan.m.r
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <Letter to ICANN Board re CTCC - 11 January 2013.pdf><Consumer_Metrics_Advice_FINAL_v4.0_clean.pdf>