- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Registerfly accreditation terminated
by Vittorio Bertola March 17, 2007

March 17, 2007

ICANN has terminated Registerfly's accreditation. In 15 days, names will be transferred to other registrars. http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-16mar07.htm -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

PSC Consultations
by Vittorio Bertola March 16, 2007

March 16, 2007

The President's Strategic Committee will hold a public online consultation on Monday, on its recommendations on the future of ICANN: http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14mar07.htm -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

ALAC Draft Resolution on Domain Tasting
by Izumi AIZU March 16, 2007

March 16, 2007

Dear ALAC/RALO/ALS people, At the last ALAC conference call, I volunteered to write some draft resolution for ALAC on Domain Tasting (and Domain monetization). With my limited knowledge, I rather hesitate, but put forward the following as a very crude draft. I owe much part to John Levin's comment (on internal list months ago), who unfortunately left ALAC recently. I hope John still watch this open list and make further contribution, together with all others. I repeat this is very very crude, and I am aware that some porposals may not be readily accepted by you guys, especially in the area of domain monetization. I still feel that the speculation is not for the interest of ordinary users, perhaps OK with Domainers as new and innovative industry. For that, I really like you to come up with clear and convincing ideas and solutions. This draft is just a step stone for that. Thanks, izumi *Draft Resolution on Domain Tasting ICANN AtLarge Advisory Committee (ALAC) V. 0.8 Mar 12 2007* * * On behalf of the ordinary Internet users, AtLarge Advisory Committee (ALAC) would like to propose the following actions to be taken by the ICANN Community on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization. *To gNSO Council:* Start a Policy Development Process on Domain Tasting. We believe that Domain Tasting is an abuse of existing Five-day Add Grace Period which results confusion for the ordinary Internet users and give unfair treatment to peculiar speculators. We propose to abandon the five day "Add Grace period". *To Registrars Constituency:* Finalize and implement Registrars Code of Conduct that prohibits unfair speculation and exploitation on Domain name registration including the use of five day Add Grace period. *To Registry Constituency:* We request the registries to consider how to avoid user confusion and unfair practices by abolishing the five day add grace period. Adding small fee, such as 25 cents per Domain to those registrants who kept their names using add grace period may be one solution, but we are not fully convinced. *To ICANN Board: *We request ICANN Board to seriously consider how to prohibit unfair speculation, enhance consumer trust to Domain Name registration system, by a) Initiating a third party study on the impact of Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization/speculation to the ordinary Internet users. b) Initiating review of Registry – Registrar Contract that will promote the fair trade and restrict unfair speculation. *Background and Rationale:* Domain tasting uses the five day add grace period to register domains without paying for them. We think they are unfair acts: somewhere between larceny and extortion, because the registration cost is zero and the purpose of these registrations is just to make money taking advantage of automated bulk registration to exploit the domain names which are the public goods in essence. As many people have noted, it's exploiting a loophole that shouldn't be there in the first place. There was a great deal of debate both in the ICANN community and on the ICANN board about the deletion grace period, but none at all about add grace which was apparently tossed into the package by an ICANN staffer without asking anyone. So says Karl Auerbach, who was on the board at the time, and I haven't seen anything to the contrary from any other board member. As Bob Parsons wrote in his blog: *Millions of good .COM domain names – on any given day over 3.5 million and climbing — are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others who would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names expire. When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up – and taken away with a huge expensive hassle to follow – by an add/drop registrar. * (http://www.bobparsons.com/adddropscheme.html) The usual explanation of domain tasting says that the registrars register millions of domains, watch the traffic, and then after 4.9 days they delete the ones that don't seem likely to make back the US$6.00. Often they just delete them all and then reregister what they can a few minutes later until they find the ones which produce enough traffic that yields well above $6 cost. The add grace period is just a mistake. The problem it purports to solve is not and never was an important one. If you let an important domain expire, you risk losing the entire investment made in that domain over many years. But if one registers a domain by mistake, the most one risks is the ten or twenty dollars you paid to register it. *On Domain Monetization* We note that there is a meaningful difference between domain tasting and domain monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage between the cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much pay-per-click traffic as the domain owner can get from people who visit web sites in the domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have no useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by tricking people, either via typos or recently expired domains. We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a regulator to watch and prohibit the Domain monetization practice. Instead, we like to ask those commercial activities such as Google or Overture to stop paying for clicks on pages with no content, thereby dealing with a problem that is not limited to typo and expired domains. We've seen click arbitrage, people buying Google ads to drive traffic to pages that are simply other Google ads. This kind of self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising is confusing and unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and , in the long run, not healthy for the development of Internet as a whole. END

3 2

Fwd: [gnso-dow123] ICANN posts Final Task Force Report On Whois Services
by Wendy Seltzer March 16, 2007

March 16, 2007

>From: "GNSO.SECRETARIAT(a)GNSO.ICANN.ORG" <gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org> >User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) > >FYI > >[To: ga[at]gnso.icann.org; announce[at]gnso.icann.org] >[To: liaison6c[at]gnso.icann.org; council[at]gnso.icann.org] >[To: regional-liaisons[at]icann.org] > >ICANN posts Final Task Force Report On Whois Services >http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-16mar07.htm > >Final Task force report on WHOIS Services >http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/whois-services-final-tf-report-1… > >Proposed Changes to the Whois Service - ICANN Staff Discussion Points >http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/staff-discussion-points-whois-fi… >To assist the GNSO in its deliberations, and to >support the work of the community, the ICANN >staff has prepared 'Staff Notes on Potential >Implementation Issues.' This document details >implementation questions and issues relating to >the Task Force policy recommendation and its >minority report the 'Operational Point of >Contact' (OPoC) proposal and the 'Special >Circumstances' proposal -- and is intended to >inform ongoing policy work on these issues in a constructive way. > >Online Discussion Forum on Final Task Force Report > >Submit comments to: whois-comments-2007(a)icann.org >View comments at http://forum.icann.org/lists/whois-comments-2007/ > >A forum has been set up to facilitate further >discussion on Whois and the Final Task Force >Report. This forum is not part of the formal >policy development process, but has been created >to allow ICANN stakeholders to continue to share >and discuss their views on the output of the >Whois Task Force and to inform the process as it >moves forward at the GNSO Council level. > >Next Steps > >The GNSO Council will now begin consideration of >the Task Force recommendations. The Council will >hold public discussions on this topic during the >ICANN Lisbon meetings, and will continue its >work online and through conference calls >thereafter (updates on Council Whois activities >can be found at >http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/) >Following its deliberations, the GNSO Council >may make a policy recommendation to the ICANN >Board. Should the ICANN Board receive a >recommendation from the GNSO Council, it must >then consider whether to accept it. > > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat - ICANN >gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org > -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [APAC-Discuss] ALAC Draft Resolution on Domain Tasting
by Izumi AIZU March 15, 2007

March 15, 2007

2007/3/15, cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au <cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au>: > > Thank you Izumi, for both your draft and an excellent working example > of how such a draft can activate (and make easier) direct input into > ALAC processes by both RALO's and ALS's... I know I always find it > easier to get our AUstralian constituency to respond to a draft or > white paper (or fill out a short survey) rather than find the time to > answer open ended "what is you opinion on / of ???" questions... That is quite true. I am happy to be a part of the process. May ISOC-AU as an ALS in the APRALO distribute this draft text as a > request for comment through our mailing list to Members and via our > related contacts in both business and general consumer peak bodies and > lists, here in .au; and presuming you will permit us to reproduce, > when is the deadline for feedback and response? Sure, that is more than welcome. AND, though we have not set the fixed deadline, we like to read this at the ICANN Lisbon meeting as our consensus of ALAC/RALO - so for that, we need to hear from your perhaps one week from now, meaning next Wednesday or so. thanks again, izumi Kindest regards, > > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > > > > Quoting Izumi AIZU <iza(a)anr.org>: > > > Dear ALAC/RALO/ALS people, > > > > At the last ALAC conference call, I volunteered to write some draft > > resolution for ALAC on Domain Tasting (and Domain monetization). > > > > With my limited knowledge, I rather hesitate, but put forward the > following > > as a very crude draft. I owe much part to John Levin's comment (on > internal > > list months ago), who unfortunately left ALAC recently. I hope John > still > > watch this open list and make further contribution, together with all > > others. > > > > I repeat this is very very crude, and I am aware that some porposals may > not > > be readily accepted by you guys, especially in the area of domain > > monetization. > > > > I still feel that the speculation is not for the interest of ordinary > users, > > perhaps OK with Domainers as new and innovative industry. For that, I > really > > like you to come up with clear and convincing ideas and solutions. This > > draft is just a step stone for that. > > > > Thanks, > > > > izumi > > > > > > > > *Draft Resolution on Domain Tasting > > ICANN AtLarge Advisory Committee (ALAC) > > > > V. 0.8 > > Mar 12 2007* > > * > > > > * > > On behalf of the ordinary Internet users, AtLarge Advisory Committee > (ALAC) > > would like to propose the following actions to be taken by the ICANN > > Community on Domain Tasting and Domain Monetization. > > > > *To gNSO Council:* > > Start a Policy Development Process on Domain Tasting. We believe that > Domain > > Tasting is an abuse of existing Five-day Add Grace Period which results > > confusion for the ordinary Internet users and give unfair treatment to > > peculiar speculators. We propose to abandon the five day "Add Grace > period". > > > > > > *To Registrars Constituency:* > > Finalize and implement Registrars Code of Conduct that prohibits unfair > > speculation and exploitation on Domain name registration including the > use > > of five day Add Grace period. > > > > *To Registry Constituency:* > > We request the registries to consider how to avoid user confusion and > unfair > > practices by abolishing the five day add grace period. Adding small fee, > > such as 25 cents per Domain to those registrants who kept their names > using > > add grace period may be one solution, but we are not fully convinced. > > *To ICANN Board: > > *We request ICANN Board to seriously consider how to prohibit unfair > > speculation, enhance consumer trust to Domain Name registration system, > by > > a) Initiating a third party study on the impact of Domain Tasting and > Domain > > Monetization/speculation to the ordinary Internet users. > > b) Initiating review of Registry ? Registrar Contract that will promote > the > > fair trade and restrict unfair speculation. > > > > *Background and Rationale:* > > Domain tasting uses the five day add grace period to register domains > > without paying for them. We think they are unfair acts: somewhere > between > > larceny and extortion, because the registration cost is zero and the > purpose > > of these registrations is just to make money taking advantage of > automated > > bulk registration to exploit the domain names which are the public goods > in > > essence. > > > > As many people have noted, it's exploiting a loophole that shouldn't be > > there in the first place. There was a great deal of debate both in the > > ICANN community and on the ICANN board about the deletion grace period, > but > > none at all about add grace which was apparently tossed into the package > by > > an ICANN staffer without asking anyone. So says Karl Auerbach, who was > on > > the board at the time, and I haven't seen anything to the contrary from > any > > other board member. > > > > As Bob Parsons wrote in his blog: > > *Millions of good .COM domain names ? on any given day over 3.5 million > and > > climbing ? are unfairly made unavailable to small businesses and others > who > > would actually register and use them in ways for which the names were > > intended. Many times businesses accidentally let their domain names > expire. > > When they go to renew them, they find they have been snapped up ? and > taken > > away with a huge expensive hassle to follow ? by an add/drop registrar. > * > > (http://www.bobparsons.com/adddropscheme.html) > > > > The usual explanation of domain tasting says that the registrars > register > > millions of domains, watch the traffic, and then after 4.9 days they > delete > > the ones that don't seem likely to make back the US$6.00. Often they > just > > delete them all and then reregister what they can a few minutes later > until > > they find the ones which produce enough traffic that yields well above > $6 > > cost. > > > > The add grace period is just a mistake. The problem it purports to solve > is > > not and never was an important one. If you let an important domain > expire, > > you risk losing the entire investment made in that domain over many > years. > > But if one registers a domain by mistake, the most one risks is the ten > or > > twenty dollars you paid to register it. > > > > *On Domain Monetization* > > We note that there is a meaningful difference between domain tasting and > > domain monetization. Monetization is a straightforward arbitrage between > the > > cost of domain registrations and the revenue from as much pay-per-click > > traffic as the domain owner can get from people who visit web sites in > the > > domain. It's a fundamentally sleazy business, since the web sites have > no > > useful content and the way they get the traffic is basically by tricking > > people, either via typos or recently expired domains. > > > > We do not think it is appropriate in this case to make ICANN as a > regulator > > to watch and prohibit the Domain monetization practice. Instead, we like > to > > ask those commercial activities such as Google or Overture to stop > paying > > for clicks on pages with no content, thereby dealing with a problem that > is > > not limited to typo and expired domains. We've seen click arbitrage, > people > > buying Google ads to drive traffic to pages that are simply other Google > > ads. This kind of self-generating traffic for pay-per-click advertising > is > > confusing and unnecessary for ordinary Internet users and , in the long > run, > > not healthy for the development of Internet as a whole. > > > > END > > > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org

1 0

.xxx
by Vittorio Bertola March 14, 2007

March 14, 2007

All, the Board is likely to take a decision on the controversial proposal to create the .xxx TLD - for "adult material" on the Internet - quite soon, possibly in Lisbon. To this effect, it would be good for me and for the ALAC to hear your voices and reasons in support or against the creation of this new domain. (It'd be better if they were based on the specific proposal, rather than on generic judgements of the opportunity of having pornographic sites on the Internet.) I think that, in the end, each Board member will vote according to their own personal opinion (and we don't have votes) but maybe some good arguments from the At Large might help them to make up their final decision. So, what do you think about this matter? Thanks, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

Draft Agendas for African, European, and ALAC Meetings in Lisbon
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 13, 2007

March 13, 2007

Dear At-Large Community members: You can now find draft agendas for the At-Large community meetings online. The African and European regions are encouraged to discuss the agendas and propose changes. Note that the documents related to each agenda item will be uploaded as they become available and links to the documents will be found alongside the agenda items that they are associated with. The agendas can be found as follows: Africa: https://st.icann.org/afralo/index.cgi?icann_lisbon_meetings Europe: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?lisbon_icann_meeting At-Large Advisory Committee: https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi? alac_meeting_agendas In addition, you will find pages for nominations of regional leaders for Europe and Africa off of the meeting pages for each region. Those travelling to Lisbon should also subscribe via RSS to the Travel Information page, or check back often, as this page will be kept current with information about hotels, airport transfers, and mobile phone numbers to call in case of problems. We hope that these pages over the coming days help you to prepare for Lisbon and for those attending the Lisbon meeting we look forward to meeting you at the end of the month! -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

[Fwd: [gnso-dow123] FW: [council] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services]
by Wendy Seltzer March 13, 2007

March 13, 2007

The WHOIS Task Force report, in which a majority of the voting delegates supported the Operational Point of Contact (OPOC) proposal to replace display of registrants' personal data with a listing for an OPOC (which could be the registrant or a delegated point of contact). ALAC did not have a vote on the task force. As an individual, I recommended the further limitation of personal data collection and display in WHOIS. --Wendy -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [gnso-dow123] FW: [council] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:46:53 +0100 From: Maria Farrell <maria.farrell(a)icann.org> To: <gnso-dow123(a)gnso.icann.org> Dear Task Force members, FYI, below is the email I just sent to the GNSO Council with the Task Force report. When the Staff Notes on potential implementation issues is finalised - over the next day or so - I will also forward this to the Task Force. All the best, Maria _____ From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Maria Farrell Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 4:37 PM To: 'Council GNSO' Subject: [council] Final Task Force Report on Whois Services Dear Council members, Attached is the Final Task Force Report on Whois Services which has been finalised following a Task Force vote that concluded on Saturday, 10 March. The report represents over months' work on the part of the Task Force and its chair, Jordyn Buchanan. The report's policy recommendation, by a simple majority of 7:6, is the OPoC proposal. The minority recommendation in the report is the Special Circumstances proposal. This report is tabled as an agenda item on this week's GNSO Council call. I also expect to circulate Staff Notes on potential implementation issues regarding the Task Force Recommendation and the minority recommendation ahead of the Council call. Best regards, Maria Farrell -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/

3 2

Geographic Regions Review
by Nick Ashton-Hart March 12, 2007

March 12, 2007

Dear Community: The following presentation from the Sao Paulo meeting may be useful, especially for those who are new to ICANN. It discusses why the current review of Geographic Regions in ICANN is important and what the regions are used for. I hope you find it helpful. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

ICANN IDN Laboratory test results online
by Hong Xue March 12, 2007

March 12, 2007

Dear At-Large Community The positive IDN Laboratory test results that have just been posted on www.icann.org - see directly at: http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-4-07mar07.htm It concludes that "during these tests, we were unable to detect any deviation at all in any part of the system from the normal behaviour of DNS systems. The addition of IDN strings seems to have had no measurable effect at all on the qualitative performance of the test systems." These positive results will enable ICANN to move forward with the test of phase II. Phase II is currently under development but will be communicated as soon as possible. Hong ALAC IDN Liaison

5 6