Dear Wolfgang, Excellent election platform! ALAIN BERRANGER 2011/10/8 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < [log in to unmask]> > Hi everybody > > sorry for my late reply. Very busy schedule the last two weeks since Avri > posted the seven questions. Here are my answers for you critical evaluation. > I would be thankful for additional questions and comments. > > Thanks > > wolfgang. > > > Question 1: > How does one achieve greater participation from NCSG members. What is the > responsibility of the Chair/council member in the effort to achieve greater > participation. > > a. to bring good arguments from a non-commercial user perspective to the > broader public debate to make it attractive for potential new members to > join; > b. to work closely with related constituencies within ICANN (in particular > the At Large community) to encourage them, to become also engaged in NC > issues > c. to use outside events (IGF, academic and professional meetings, summer > schools etc.) to speak about NC and to attract in particular member of the > younger generation and woman also from developing countries to become > active. > > > Question 2: > What is your view on the meaning of non commercial presence and activities > in the GNSO? > > The majority of the two billion Internet users worldwide are non-commercial > users. A lot of them takes it for granted that the Internet, the DNS and > other Internet applications works. This creates a special responsibility and > duty for the non-commercial constituency within ICANN. It has to proof its > legitimacy to act on behalf of the individual non-commercial users and it is > the duty of this constituency to guarantee that basic interests of > individual Internet users (human rights, freedom of expression, privacy, > access etc) with regard to the functioning of the DNS, allocation of IP > addresses and management of Internet protocols and root servers are > integrated in policies which are developed by ICANN. > > > Question 3: > What do you foresee as the most important issue for the NCSG during the > next year. 2 years? > > a. the new gTLD Programm > b. Whois and Privacy Issues > > > Question 4: > How do you see your role as a representative of the NCSG that elected you. > In what way are you to be held accountable to the NCSG membership? > > It would be my duty to bring agreed positions of the members of the > constituency to the council deliberations. It would be also my duty to > report back periodically about the debates and my own role in the > discussion. There should be a special "reporting back" agenda item in the > NGSC constituency meetings in each ICANN meeting with Q&A. > > > Question 5: What is your view on the issue of UDRP review? Are there > respondents rights that need attention such as the length of time a > respondent gets to respond. > > The UDRP needs a more compehensive and external review. It shoud become > part of the general review under the AoC. There is a need not only to > improve the efficiency of the existing UDRP, there is also a need to > identify issues which have raised concerns, including the impression of a > unbalanced trend in the decisions of the UDRP panels, its independence and > neutrality, and the the diversity of UDRP service providers. This includes > also an indepedent review whether "forum shopping" is a real threat. This > seems in particular important with regard to potential dispute following the > introduction of new gTLDs. > > > Question 6: > What are you views on the new gTLD program that is scheduled to begin > accepting applications in Jan. 2012. What, if anything, should be changed in > this round? What, if anything, should be changed in the next round? > > > a. the plan as it is now outrolled for 2012 should get a chance to > demonstrate its potential. We have to wait and see how many applications are > coming and what results (and unintended side results) the evaluation process > will produce. NCSG should insists that from the very first day of the > process there should be an independent review process in place for each > individual step which would guarantee the highest level of transparency. > b. in the mid term there should be more differentiated conditions and > criteria for specifc applicants (developing cuntries, public authorities, > NGOs, civil society groups, cultural communities etc.) NSCG should start a > discussion about categorization, including a categorie of nom-commercial > gTLDs, which should be treated differentily from commercial gTLDs. > > Question 7: > In terms of the RAA, what are you views on modifying that that agreement. > How do you view the relationship betwee the Registrars and the ICANN > Community? > > There is a need for an ongoing review of the existing RAA, in particular > with regard to new models under the vertical integration option. There is a > need to avoid the emergence of dominant market power both on the registry > and registrar level and it seems also important o overcame an imbalance in > the regional distribution of registrars and registries. An indepedent review > group should produce an annual report about market diversity both on the > registrar and the registry level. > > > > Wolfgang > > > > > > > -- Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca<http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca Trustee, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/ O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824 Skype: alain.berranger