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 >