Hi,

Related to the discussion about developing economies and gTLD, ICANN board
just voted this resolution waiving the registrar insurance requirement
which represents a barrier in many developing countries
https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-waives-registrar-insurance-requirement-levels-playing-field-for-registrars-globally

Rafik
On Sep 30, 2015 8:56 PM, "Rafik Dammak" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> trying to summarize the topics suggested until now, I tried to capture
> comments as much as possible but maybe I missed things.
>
> - *Public Interest: *
> *"Can we ask the board how it is coming with its research in the "global
> public interest". In the annual mtg last where we asked the board about its
> understanding of the global public interest, how it determines, on what
> basis, etc.  At that time, the board said it was just getting started on
> compiling some research that it would share and had hired Nora.  So it
> would be great if we could have an update or further conversation on this
> concept, how it is determined and applies, etc."*
>
> there was several comments with that regard indicating that a research is
> ongoing and mostly done within ICANN, not looking outside . a consultation
> process is planned and starting in Q4 to get community input and continue
> till June 2016.
>
> -* Developing countries:*
> starting with the Nielsen report (
> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-09-25-en)
> "Nielsen's report confirms that Latin America, Asia and Africa will likely
> be the great drivers of new gTLD acceptance and use, while most registries
> are still based in developed regions. There is a net transference of
> resources taking place from the developing to the developed world in the
> DNS industry. The problems that developing regions face have been
> extensively explained.  What is the perception of the board? In the opinion
> of board members, which concrete measures could be put in place? Why not
> even suggestions from the JAS report have been implemented yet? Would the
> board commit to a clear plan to address the current imbalances before a new
> round of applications is launched?"
>
> there was also comment that we can also ask the Global Domain Division
> (GDD) during a GNSO session . Others mentioned: knowledge imbalance,
> capacity building and remediation mechanisms of imbalance in next rounds
>
> about this issue, I would remind people that we got lately 3 reports in
> relation to that, it will be useful to go through them :
> - regarding next rounds
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en
> - review on previous new gTLD round:
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-draft-review-2015-09-23-en
> - assessment of new gTLD program with regard to competition:
> https://www.icann.org/public-comments/competitive-effects-assessment-2015-09-28-en
>
> - *Human Rights*
>
> "With the CCWP on HR we'll be publishing a new report on ICANN and
>
> human rights (comments still very welcome until Wednesday 30 23:59
>
> here: http://is.gd/gItc5W ). So perhaps we can ask ICANN about how
>
> they envisage living up to article 4 of the articles of incorporation
>
> and whether there are concrete plans to do or develop:
>
> 1. A human rights policy
>
> 2. A human rights impact assessment
>
> 3. A full corporate social responsibility strategy
>
> in order to live up to the existing commitments. And whether they are
>
> thinking of using the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human
>
> Rights for this. And of course: what is the timeline for this."
>
>
> I would like to add comment about developing countries and new gTLD
> program issue, there was a lot of work done by NCSG on that matter within
> GNSO and we succeeded in 2010 to get a joint working on new gTLD applicant
> support, with the active participation of several NCSG members.
>  A report  was delivered with several recommendations , some of them were
>  approved in 2011 by the board :
>
> - timeline for the working group is here
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2011/jas
>
> -  the report there
> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/jas-final-report-2011-10-13-en
>
> - the  implementation is here
> http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support)
>
> the result of the implementation was satisfactory due partly that the
> program was implemented quite late when the new gTLD program itself was
> starting and there was no significant outreach to get more applicants from
> developing regions.
>
> The same issue concerns having more registrars from developing countries
> and there was last year  a consultation launched by ICANN staff
> https://community.icann.org/display/prjctgdduro/Project+Roadmap%3A+Supporting+the+Domain+Name+Industry+in+Underserved+Regions
> .
>
> I would conclude about this  that we should leverage those existing
> initiatives to go further and be effective.
>
>
> going back to the topics discussion, it still going on and we should tune
> and refine the topics and their descriptions. other suggestions are welcome
> too.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rafik Dammak
>
> NCSG Chair
>