How about send to board and publish on Circle ID? On Jan 11, 2013, at 10:47 PM, Wendy Seltzer <[log in to unmask]> 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>