These are all excellent points with which I agree. Thanks for raising them. Stephanie Perrin On 2015-09-10 13:04, Phil Corwin wrote:
Point of inquiry: Was publication of this notice triggered by Council support for a CCWG to determine criteria for utilization of new gTLD auction funds, or was it triggered independently? The referenced Discussion paper, in Section 3.1.4, seems to state that it was suggested at the SO/AC High Interest Topic Discussion and the Workshop held in BA and is not directly related to the CCWG process.
The discussion paper, in its introduction, calls for participation “from both within and outside the ICANN community”. That seems at odds with a CCWG, which is of course made up of ICANN community members. It also seems to echo elements of the email that Steve Crocker sent when he first learned of potential support for a CCWG. I also remain unclear about whether there is any meaningful distinction between the ICANN community and other Internet-related interests or entities who do not participate in it -- given that ICANN participation is open to everyone without barriers as well as the very high physical and remote attendance at contemporary ICANN meetings.
I am also curious regarding the origin of the Issues to be Considered and Addressed catalogued in section 4 of the paper. I don’t have any specific objection to any of them but wonder where they came from – and whether the list of potential issues shouldn’t properly come from those who engage in this comment process and a future CCWG.
I further note this part of the Notice:
*/Next Steps:/*This discussion paper is published for public comment in order to allow for additional input before this paper is submitted to the drafting team, which is expected to be tasked with developing a proposed charter for a Cross-Community Working Group for consideration, *unless another approach is suggested* as part of the public comment period and *which is then deemed preferable*. (emphasis added)
It is not clear whether “another approach” refers to the Charter drafting team, or to the CCWG itself. If it is the latter (which seems more logical, as every CCWG needs a Charter drafted) then it would seem that there may be some intent to undermine a CCWG proceeding. In any event, I think this assertion needs clarification.
Finally, I am curious about what prompted the publication of this notice at this time, as it sets a comment deadline of October 18 – which is the starting Sunday of the Dublin ICANN meeting – which means that the comments cannot possibly be evaluated in time to inform any discussion of this topic in Dublin. The disposition of $60-million+ is a very important topic and asking the community to submit well-considered input at a time when so many remain heavily engaged on stewardship and accountability seems questionable. Further, I was under the impression that there was a general policy against setting deadlines that coincided with ICANN public meetings.
I would appreciate some response to this request for clarification on the points raised above.
Thanks and best regards, Philip
*Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal*
*Virtualaw LLC*
*1155 F Street, NW*
*Suite 1050*
*Washington, DC 20004*
*202-559-8597/Direct*
*202-559-8750/Fax*
*202-255-6172/cell***
**
*Twitter: @VlawDC*
*/"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey/*
*From:*owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Glen de Saint Géry *Sent:* Thursday, September 10, 2015 6:44 AM *To:* GNSO Council List (council@gnso.icann.org) *Subject:* [council] New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper - call for comments
*New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper *https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-auction-proceeds-2015-09-08-e...
*Open Date:*8 Sep 2015 23:59 UTC
*Close Date:*18 Oct 2015 23:59 UTC
*Staff Report Due:*1 Nov 2015 23:59 UTC
Comments close in 38 Days
Submit Comment to Forum <mailto:comments-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-08sep15@icann.org>
Comments Forum <http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-08sep15/> http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-new-gtld-auction-proceeds-08sep15/
Brief Overview
/*Purpose:*/This is a discussion paper <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds/discussion-paper-07sep15-en.pdf>[PDF, 455 KB] on the proceeds from ICANN-conducted auctions for contested new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) strings. This paper calls for broad, open and inclusive public comment and encourages participation from all sectors, regions and levels (or no level) of engagement with the ICANN community.
/*Current Status:*/This paper aims to capture the information and input on this topic to date as well as outlining potential questions and issues to be addressed in the subsequent phases of the process to determine next steps in relation to new gTLD Auction Proceeds.
/*Next Steps:*/This discussion paper is published for public comment in order to allow for additional input before this paper is submitted to the drafting team, which is expected to be tasked with developing a proposed charter for a Cross-Community Working Group for consideration, unless another approach is suggested as part of the public comment period and which is then deemed preferable.
Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose
Since the launch of the new gTLD Program, numerous suggestions have been made, such as during the ICANN public forum sessions at ICANN meetings, on how new gTLD auction proceeds should be spent including; suggestions that the funds should be donated to charitable organizations, support for applicants in future rounds, programs to promote new gTLDs and consumer protection, the creation of an ICANN trust, to returning the money to the applicants from the current round. However, it was not until March 2015 that the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) started discussing a possible process for facilitating the conversation around new gTLD auction proceeds during ICANN52 such as a Cross-Community Working Group (CCSG). The discussion paper <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds/discussion-paper-07sep15-en.pdf>[PDF, 455 KB] aims to capture the information and input on new gTLD Auction Proceeds to date as well as outlining potential questions and issues to be addressed in the subsequent phases of the process, such as outreach, participation and ensuring a focus on framework development, to determine next steps.
Broad, open and inclusive public comment input is sought and participation from all sectors, regions and levels (or no level) of engagement with the ICANN community is encouraged.
Section II: Background
The new gTLD Program established auctions as a mechanism of last resort to resolve string contention. Most string contentions (approximately 90% of sets scheduled for auction) have been resolved through other means before reaching an auction conducted by ICANN's authorized auction service provider, Power Auctions LLC. It was recognized from the outset that significant funds could accrue as a result of several auctions. As such, these auction proceeds have been reserved and earmarked until the Board authorizes a plan for the appropriate use of the funds through dialogue with the community. Board, staff, and community are expected to be working together in designing and participating in the next steps addressing the use of new gTLD auction proceeds. 13 contention sets have been resolved via ICANN Auction since June 2014. The total net proceeds to date are $58.8 million USD. Details of the proceeds can be found at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds.
Section III: Relevant Resources
* New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds/discussion-paper-07sep15-en.pdf>[PDF, 455 KB] * For more information about ICANN and its work, visit www.ICANN.org <https://www.icann.org/> * For more information about the new gTLD program associated with these proceeds, visit http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/
Section IV: Additional Information
Section V: Reports
Staff Contact
Marika Konings
policy-staff@icann.org <mailto:policy-staff@icann.org>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2015.0.6081 / Virus Database: 4401/10465 - Release Date: 08/19/15 Internal Virus Database is out of date.