On 03/04/2012 12:14 PM, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:
I would agree with ALAC's opinion on Red Cross and International Olymic Commitee "we see no substantial reason to afford to the Red Cross and the Olympic movement protections not available to other rights holders",
I also agree with this point of view. In my mind there might be some argument that the Red Cross (and the Red Crescent) deserve recognition for a long history of good works. (I can't quite same the same about the Olympic Committee - particularly the US incarnation.) But the larger issue is who are we to decide who is the more worthy. Some might claim that PETA (whether it be the "ethical treatment" or "tasty animals" claimant) is worthy of the lofty position from which one gets to reserve or withhold a top level name? My own point of view is that ICANN has made it so hard and expensive to obtain a TLD that such are now reserved only to the rich and well established - which is often the converse of those who have dedicated their resources to the public good - For instance, could M. Gandhi have passed ICANN muster and paid the fees? However, as Jeff N. pointed out, there is the separate issue of process. Is it rather late in the TLD game for these issues to be raised? --karl--