All: I appreciate Mawaki gathering together the NCUC's submission for the gTLD proceeding. Basic documents are posted at www.gnso.icann.org under Call for Papers -- Policy Development for Introduction of New gTLDs, if you want to see the papers or comments submitted to date. Great thanks to Milton on starting on this discussion. On January 2, taking no time to recover from New Years festivities, he posted a draft set of comments. His comments are posted on our NCUC website at http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0601&L=ncuc-discuss&T=0&F=&S=&P=250. I share my thoughts and edits below. Overall, I agree completely with Milton, and think we should take his comments one step further. We should warn the GNSO Council about the Business/Intellectual drive to allow only sponsored top level domains (.MUSEUM, etc) and the new push from them to allow only "one-company" top level domains -- .DISNEY and .O (Overstock.com) are being discussed. These groups are staunchly opposed to opening up the gTLD process to the general top level domains that would serve our communities. Also, let's not get personal about those who oppose us (at least, not yet). We can take the high ground with Milton's clean, clear approach that ICANN should adopt a few basic technical rules to protect the Internet, and then open the process of choosing new top level domains to a market-oriented, open one (so let's delete the paragraphs about ccTLDs). My comments below (and also attached in a text document). My proposals for additions and changes to Milton's comments are in CAPS. Thanks again to Milton and Mawaki. Regards, Kathy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------- NONCOMMERCIAL CONSTITUENCY COMMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE GNSO IN RESPONSE TO THE CALL FOR COMMENTS IN THE NEW gTLD POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY HAS DULY CONSIDERED THE QUESTIONS AND ISSUES RAISED BY THE GNSO IN THIS PROCEEDING, AND WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT OUR COMMENTS BELOW. 1. Should new generic top level domain names be introduced? ABSOLUTELY. ICANN WAS CREATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF OVERSEEING [some words deleted here] a well-defined, efficient and fair TLD addition process. It is time to open up that process as quickly and as broadly as possible. THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY SUBMITS THAT THE domain name market, like the Internet itself, MUST NOT be frozen or static. A refusal to add any new gTLDs is not an option. The operation of gTLD registries is currently confined to a tiny handful of operators in the countries where the Internet developed first (mostly the U.S.). About 80% of the gTLD market is concentrated in the hands of one operator. The introduction of "internationalized" or multilingual DNS and the growth of the Internet in developing countries with different scripts, cultures, and naming ideas AMONG OTHER GOOD PRESSURES will inevitably create legitimate demand for new gTLDs. [PARAGRAPHS REORDERED BELOW] As a technical coordinator, ICANN MUST accommodate demands for new gTLDs as long as there are no adverse technical consequences. We know for a fact that periodic addition of THE limited number of new TLDs TO DATA has NOT CREATE ANY adverse technical consequences (SOURCE: experience and expert studies such as the U.S. National Research Council study "Signposts in Cyberspace.") Any attempt to shut the door on the rest of the world at this time is not viable from a political or economic standpoint. OVERALL, ICANN must not shut off the opportunity for new businesses and new constituency groups to propose and operate new gTLDs. To do so would be to permanently block two-thirds of the world from the expertise and wealth that can be gained from participation in this industry, and subject most of the world to the market power of ccTLDs or the current dominant operator. As long as there is growth in the Internet, there will be interest in A BROAD RANGE OF new gTLD names. 2. Selection Criteria for New Top Level Domains a. [Questions: develop modified or new criteria which specifically address ICANN's goals of expanding the use and usability of the Internet. In particular, examine ways in which the allocation of new top level domains can meet demands for broader use of the Internet in developing countries.] THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY REJECTS the premise of this statement. ICANN has no mandate in its mission or core values to "expand the use and usability of the Internet." ICANN does, however, have the promotion of competition as one of its core values (see Section 2, Core Values No. 5 and 6 in the ICANN Bylaws). Fundamentally, IT IS ICANN's job to coordinate the unique technical parameters of Internet identifiers in a way that fosters the openness, diversity and competitiveness of the domain name registration market. The best way to do this is to make ICANN's selection criteria as simple, predictable and content-neutral as possible. SUCH A POLITICS-FREE ENVIRONMENT WOULD MAKE it MUCH easier for innovators to propose and implement new ideas. NGOs, entrepreneurs and applicants from developing countries (and elsewhere) MUST be allowed to come up with their own ideas for new TLD names and business models. ICANN'S ROLE COULD AND SHOULD BE SIMPLE: TO provide a predictable, fair and efficient process by which those ideas can be accepted or rejected, coordinated and implemented. The NCUC FURTHER submits that ICANN's only role in the acceptance process SHOULD BE TO DETERMINE WHETHER A GTLD APPLICATION MEETS THE minimal technical and operational criteria THAT THE GNSO AND ICANN TOGETHER SHOULD ESTABLISH, THUS ENSURING that registry operations do not harm the global compatibility of the DNS. b. [Question: Examine whether preferential selection criteria (e.g. sponsored) could be developed which would encourage new and innovative ways of addressing the needs of Internet users.] SPONSORED TOP LEVEL DOMAINS PROVED A VALUABLE, AND AT THE TIME CONTROVERSIAL, POINT. THEY SHOWED DEFINITIVELY THAT THE INTERNET AND DNS SURVIVES AND THRIVES WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF NEW gTLDS. THE NCUC SUBMITS THAT SPONSORED gTLDs ARE A BEGINNING, AND MUST NOT BE AN END. [DELETE: While NCUC has always supported the concept of sponsored domains,] The Noncommercial Users Constituency finds it unnecessary and overly restrictive TO BUILD sponsored-unsponsored concept into ICANN's PERMANENT FRAMEWORK OF NEW registry contracts. WE EXPRESSLY SUPPORT A MARKET-DRIVEN APPROACH TO NEW GTLDS THAT WILL ENCOURAGE INTERNET USERS, ORGANIZATIONS AND COMPANIES WORLDWIDE TO COME FORWARD TO THE ICANN COMMUNITY WITH THEIR IDEAS. The NCUC EXPRESSLY DOES NOT SUPPORT any attempt to declare SPONSORED DOMAIN NAMES TO BE BETTER THAN UNSPONSORED DOMAIN NAMES. IN PARTICULAR, WE WARN THE GNSO TO BE WARY OF THE GROWING PUSH FOR NEW GTLDS THAT WILL BE OPERATED EXCLUSIVELY BY OR FOR A SINGLE COMPANY. THIS MODEL, WHICH WE TITLE A "SUPER- SPONSORED" TOP LEVEL DOMAIN, SERVES NO GENERAL COMMUNITY OR PUBLIC INTEREST. IT is for individual users to decide for themselves, by selecting when and where to register. ICANN's role is not to tilt the Internet community's preferences in one way or the other, ESPECIALLY NOT TO FAVOR SPONSORED TLDS OVER UNSPONSORED. ICANN'S CLEAR ROLE IS to coordinate the introduction of ALL new gTLDs IN A WAY THAT BOTH PRESERVES GLOBAL DNS COMPATIBILITY, ALLOWS BROAD AND DECENTRALIZED INNOVATION AND EXPANSION, AND GIVES ALL A CLEAR SENSE THAT A SINGLE ROOT BROADLY SERVES INTERNET COMMUNITIES WORLDWIDE. c. [QUESTIONS: Examine whether additional criteria need to be developed which address ICANN's goals of ensuring the security and stability of the Internet.] THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY SUBMITS THAT ANY CRITERIA ADOPTED BY ICANN MUST BE carefully targeted TO issues that are part of ICANN's core mission and competence, SPECIFICALLY global DOMAIN NAME compatibility. NCUC STRONGLY SUBMITS THAT ICANN should develop a simple and objective "registry accreditation" process, similar to the registrar accreditation process. WE SUBMIT THERE should be fewer criteria, not more. 3. [Question: Allocation Methods for New Top Level Domains] ICANN AND OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY LEARNED from OUR PAINFUL past experience that the comparative evaluation or "beauty contest" model METHOD OF PICKING NEW TOP LEVEL DOMAINS/REGISTRIES is slow, politicized, manipulable and unpredictable, no matter how carefully it is administered. The results have been disastrous. THE CURRENT SELECTION PROCESS BADLY HURT THE REPUTATION OF ICANN BECAUSE SO MANY QUESTION THE RIGHT OF A few committees of 3 or 4 "experts" (mostly composed of a tiny core of ICANN-affiliated people) TO decide for a vast, diverse global market which names are desirable and legitimate [SOME WORDS DELETED]. FURTHER, ICANN's political supervisors in the U.S. and GAC have clearly demonstrated to the world that a discretionary selection process can be and will be manipulated, as pressure will be placed on the ICANN Board and staff by political interests and vested economic interests. Under ICANN's current method, applicants for new TLDs are always subject to insider lobbying by incumbents and must bargain individually with staff. THE LEGAL COSTS THEY INCUR FOR SUCH LOBBYING UNFAIRLY RAISE THE BAR OF ENTRY ONLY TO THOSE WITH STRONG AND WELL-FUNDED AMERICAN CONNECTIONS. The only escape route from this disaster is a completely neutral and objective process, such as lotteries and auctions. IN PARTICULAR, SUPER- SPONSORED DOMAIN NAMES SHOULD BE AUCTIONED, AND THOSE SURVIVING GENERAL AND/OR NONCOMMERCIAL COMMUNITIES SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED BY LOTTERY. THESE Objective, non-discriminatory methods ARE pro-competitive AND THEY WILL vastly reduce costs for new entrants by making it clear to applicants what they have to do to get a TLD, what are the anticipated expenses and what is the time line. [I WOULD RECOMMEND DELETING THIS ENTIRE SECTION ABOUT CCTLDS. I THINK WE MAKE OUR POINT INVOLVING THE OPENNESS THAT WE NEED, ETC, AND THAT THE PARAGRAPH BELOW WARNS US OF WHAT WE NEED TO BE STRATEGICALLY AWARE OF. I DON'T THINK IT SERVES OUR DIPLOMATIC INTERESTS TO HIGHLIGHT ONE PARTICULAR GROUP (OF MANY) THAT OPPOSES NEW GTLDS. Looking forward, we are becoming increasingly concerned about the influence of ccTLD managers, many of whom have openly stated to us their desire to stop any new gTLDs because they view them as threats to their own revenue stream and market share. CcTLD monopolies are particularly dangerous to ICANN's core value of competition because many of them are closely connected to their governments, who can use national regulation and international intergovernmental institutions (including GAC) to achieve protectionist goals. While we highly value ccTLDs as a source of localism and diversity in policy and service, and as a source of national identity to Internet users, we are very concerned about an ICANN TLD selection process that gives them - or any incumbent - the opportunity to block users from exercising free choice in the domain name market. This is not a criticism of the ccTLD managers themselves, who are only pursuing their self-interest. It is a criticism of an ICANN allocation method that permits established players in a market to influence who else gets to enter. 4. [QUESTION: Policy to Guide Contractual Conditions for New Top Level Domains] THE NONCOMMERCIAL USERS CONSTITUENCY FAVORS A SIMPLE, template registry contract that is uniformly applicable to all registries. We oppose individual negotiation between ICANN and prospective TOP LEVEL DOMAIN contractees. We believe that the GNSO should set general policy guiding the contracts - INCLUDING whether there should be price caps or not, or a renewal expectancy or not - and that the ICANN staff should translate those policies into generally applicable contractual terms.