- NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Re: [NA-Discuss] Brochures
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Aug. 3, 2011

Aug. 3, 2011

My intent is to do a mailing, starting with the Mixtec/Indigena Community Organization Project in Ventura County, and a hand-delivery to the Migrant Education Office in Salinas, and following through on their leads to more contacts. For this, something I can put in an envelop, or hand deliver, that can be put on a bulletin board in a common area, like a library or meeting hall, would be useful. Eric

1 0

Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- Reminder: Apply Now for the At-Large Advisory Committ
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

I've received this: > I am writing to inform you know that the 2011 ICANN Nominating Committee > will soon announce our selected nominees and that I am sorry to say you > were not successful. My prior mail on the subject is below. Eric > Olivier, > > For you information only, and not to preclude other NARALO contributors, > or others meeting the residency and interest requirements, from being > noninated, or from self-nominating. > > At the reminder by the 2011 NomCom Chair that I'd submitted applications in > prior years, and had indicated my willingness to be considered in subsequent > years, I updated my application and submitted it per the current call for > nominations process on July 10th, with copies to Joette Youkhanna and the > NomCom211 maildrop. > > Eric

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Brochures
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

> It's a little bit amusing. Glad to add to your day. Eric

1 0

Numbers
by Joly MacFie Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

> would that there were 15 more people active in naralo, that would be > more growth than the event at stanford law appears to have generated. > > -e > There must be people out there, and the gTLD action should be a galvanizing factor. We should think hard about recruitment, improve our approach, pick some targets. Where are those brochures I was promised btw? :| j -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

5 7

Does ICANN need to evolve its code of conduct?
by Thompson, Darlene Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

Here is an interesting article: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110728_does_icann_need_to_evolve_its_code_o… (this is just an FYI) D ᑕᓕᓐ ᑕᒻᓴᓐ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᖃᕆᓴᐅᔭᕐᕕᒋᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᑐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑎ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᖅᕕᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᖓᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓂᐊᕐᕕᖓ 1000, ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓ 910 ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca ᐅᖄᓚᐅᑎ: 867 975-5631 ᓱᑲᑦᑐᒃᑰᕈᑎ: 867 975-5610 Taliin Taamsan Nunalingni Qaritauyani Atuqtauningitnun Titiraqtia Nunavut Kavamangat Titiraqarvia 1000, Nayugaa 910 Iqaluit, Nunavut dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Hivayautik : 867 975-5631 Kayumiktuk : 867 975-5610 Darlene Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Corporate Services Division Department of Education Government of Nunavut PO Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, Nunavut, X0A 0H0 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Ph: 867 975-5631 Fax: 867 975-5610 Darlene Thompson Administratrice du programme d’accès communautaire Division des services ministériels Ministère de l’Éducation Gouvernement du Nunavut Case postale 1000, Succursale 910 Iqaluit Nunavut, X0A 0H0 dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca Tél. : 867 975-5631 Téléc. : 867 975-5610

8 11

Re: [NA-Discuss] Brochures
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

Garth, It is my experience writing three brouchures for CORE that brochure writing is the hardest, slowest, most contentious writing I've experienced in my professional life. Transformation from three mono-lingual three-fold to a single tri-lingual three-up means a complete re-write and redesign. Assumptions about white space and images have to be revisited, and text has to be re-written. Eric

1 0

Discount code - iBreakfast new gTLD conference on Wednesday in NYC
by Joly MacFie Aug. 2, 2011

Aug. 2, 2011

* I will tape this. http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=2384 iBreakfast <http://www.ibreakfast.com/> is presenting *“About the “Domain” Conference: The Era of New TLDs*<http://www.eventbrite.com/event/1919183329> this Wednesday Aug 3 2011 at Herrick, Feinstein LLC in NYC. A special discount code allowing 50% off the normal admission of $60 is offered to ISOC-NY members and guests. * * *What:* “About the “Domain” Conference: The Era of New TLDs *When:* Weds Aug 3 2011 8.00am – 11.30am EDT *Where:* Herrick Feinstein Auditorium, Midtown – 2 Park Ave. @32 St NYC *Who:* Register at http://www.eventbrite.com/event/1919183329 *Discount code:* ISNY ($30 + $2.49 fee) *Webcast:* Will be taped. *Twitter:* iBreakfast <https://twitter.com/search/ibreakfast> Wendy Seltzer, Esther Dyson, and Annalisa Roger, representatives of dotgay, .berlin, .xxx, plus major registries, registrars are among the participants who will discuss how the Internet will be impacted by the coming new TLD rollout. Topics include: * The Impact of New TLDs on .Com, .Org, and Country-Code Domain Extensions;Brands and SMB Opportunities to Increase Brand Identity and Optimize Marketing and Need to Act Defensively; * The Progression of World Cities gaining Sovereign Digital Land to Strengthen Public and Private Sectors and Global Relations; * The Voice of Cultural and Interest Groups to be Heard Locally, Regionally, and Globally On June 20, a new ICANN ruling on the domain registries forever altered the way brands, associations, and other entities are represented online. The “dot com” era will soon be replaced with a myriad of possibilities involving “dot brand” and “dot generic” – essentially “dot anything.” The implications for SEO and trademark protection, and the opportunities presented to brands, industry associations, and even investors, will be huge. Is this the new lakefront property bonanza of the Internet? This iBreakfast will sort though all the opportunities and surrounding issues *SPEAKERS:* Roland LaPlante, SVP, CMO, Afilias Sarah Langstone, Sarah Langstone, Director of Product Management, Verisign Ken Hansen, Sen. Dir. Business Development, New TLDs, Neustar Esther Dyson, EDventures (remote) Ben Crawford, CEO, CentralNic and dotBrand Solutions Michael Berkens, Industry Consultant & Blogger Right Of The Dot Wendy Selzer, Esq., Princeton Center for IT Policy Barry Werbin, IP Group Chair & Partner, Herrick, Feinstein LLP Robert/Stuart Lawley, CEO, ICM Registry Anastasia O’Rourke, Big Room Inc. Scott Seitz, CEO, DotGay LLC Edmun Chong, CEO, DotAsia Organisation; Dirk Kirchenowski, Founder, Dot Berlin (remote) Annalisa Roger, Founder/CEO DotGreen Community (remote) Moderated by Paul Farkas, Smart TLDs -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Please consider my nomination to the NARALO ALAC Election
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net July 30, 2011

July 30, 2011

> ... > - This is a confidential process; we have been involved in publicity but > have zero influence on how the selection happens; indeed, we will never be > informed officially of how many people stepped forward to be considered apparently the number is 15. would that there were 15 more people active in naralo, that would be more growth than the event at stanford law appears to have generated. -e

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Does ICANN need to evolve its code of conduct?
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net July 29, 2011

July 29, 2011

Colleagues, with appologies in advance for the length. I think that it is preferable in the abstract that the regulated monopoly, one of the several objects of policy identified in the Green and White Papers, does not provide staff to, or hire staff from, the DoC -- the regulating agency, or ICANN -- the delegated entity conducting rule making. So the departing Chair becoming an empolyee of, or investor in, or both, a venture intending to comply with the competitive structure, in so far as new gTLDs "compete" with the legacy monopoly (and thus far, 10 years after launch, .info has a 6% market share, .biz has a 2% market share), is not contrary to the competition policy goal expressed in the Green and White Papers. In the Affirmation of Commitments, the Department of Commerce observed there exists "a group of participants that engage in ICANN's processes to a greater extent than Internet users generally". This observation refers to the risk of agency capture, and consequent rule making contrary to the intent of the establishing legislation, which presumably includes the public interest as identified by the United States Government. During the tenure of the departing Chair, the record of the Board does not reflect consideration of a competitive tender of the .NET contract. As noted above, new gTLDs established in 20001 and 2004, in their total, have less market share than .NET. The policy, pursued by the Board in the period when Chaired by the departing Chair, has created material benefit for entities like, and including, the entity to which he is now an empolyee or investor or both, while creating no substantive reduction in the market share held by the incumbent legacy monopoly operator. Prior to taking an interest in whether there is material benefit to an officer of the corporation, there is the interest in the material benefit to the regulated industry. Verisign has done very, very well during the years the departing Chair lead the ICANN Board. It has no liabilities under the "cost recovery" model, to bear any cost in the creation of its competition, it has not been barred from increasing the number of prior franchises it holds directly, through the conversion of .NAME from a tenant to a property, is not barred from increasing the number of future franchises it will hold directly, and is not barred from increasing the number of future franchises it will hold indirectly, as tenants, subject of course, to subsequent unconditional conversion to property. And, as mentioned above, none of its contracts with ICANN were rebid competitively during the tenure of the departing Chair. And, through a process as yet undisclosed, it has been relieved of the structural separation obligation obtained by a prior Board, under a prior Chair. This is substantial material benefit for the regulated monopoly. As marks portfolio managers and governments have observed throughout the period a policy directly benefiting the incumbent monopoly was developed and implemented, the primary revenue source for "generic" new gTLDs is likely to be compelled from marks holders, a source of revenue the incumbent monopoly currently enjoys. As a condition for "no harm" to the incumbent monopoly, ending legal challenges by the incumbent monopoly to abandoned competitive policy developed by prior Boards lead by prior Chairs, the Board lead by the departing Chair has simply created a revenue sharing opportunity, to which the departing Chair now participates. This is a real problem. The competition policy goals of the United States are not met by a policy of non-competition and the creation of a mechanism for revenue sharing by non-competitors through expanded exploitation of a captive market. The problem doesn't go away or get better because the captive market is IP holders acting in their own narrow self interest, and inflicting collateral damage of their own, limiting the choice of sponsored TLDs in the public interest in the 2004 round to just the Catalan and Postal Union applications. I think the points of views of governments other than the United States, whether Canada or China, reasonably place the interests of those governments ahead of the competitive policy interest of the United States. Canada has a rational interest in ICANN as a policy venue, but little or no interest in competition policy affecting COM/NET/NAME, or namespaces other than .CA. China too has a rational interest in ICANN as a policy venue, and in the (I'm deliberately not using the Han script characters or the Pinyan transliteration into Latin script as I don't think these are widely known outside of China and some specialists in IDN policy) "com-like", "net-like", "org-like" and "gov-like" namespaces, in addition to the .CN namespace, but not directly in competition policy affecting COM/NET/NAME. That is, I understand a reason why Byron Holland may have chosen his issue, and his comparisons with the World Bank's policy, and the policy of the Federal Government of Canada, to make a point. The "personal ethics" narrative has the attraction of being uncomplicated, relative to the competition policy and national public interest narrative. I don't conclude that a change to ICANN's code of conduct is curative of the root problem, which Byron identifies only in the exit strategy of a participant in what appears to be agency capture. I'm personally quite indifferent to the "next" choices of departed Board Chairs, CEOs and Vice Presidents, though concerned by the "change or leave" policy of the most recent CEO hire and its effect on competent senior staff. I suggest that members of NARALO, particularly those who view ICANN in part through the framework of US law, reach out to those in the NARALO who may not come easily to this framework, and offer their comments on the necessity of viewing this transition solely as a code of conduct issue, and the utility of overlooking the benefit to the incumbent monopoly operator. Eric

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] Does ICANN need to evolve its code of conduct?
by ebw＠abenaki.wabanaki.net July 29, 2011

July 29, 2011

Hi Evan, > After a lengthy, well-written and detailed account of how ICANN actions > have benefited various parties without curtailing monopoly power and thus > harming the public good... That is kind. Thank you. > ... you conclude by a curt advocacy to "overlook" this. Ah! Bad writing on my part. I meant "don't overlook the benefit to Versign, and the process which made it possible, when looking at the transition, there is much more than a single 'code of conduct' question involving a former Chair in the pursuit of material interest." If Byron wants to chase Peter with pitchforkes and torches, fine. What I want is for the Department of Justice to write the Department of Commerce asking "got competition yet?", and for the Department of Commerce to write the new Chair that competition policy is mandatory to implement. This assumes that the new Chair is as indifferent to competition, and as deferential to Verisign's interests, as his predecessor, a fact not in evidence. I hope that clarifies, and of course the same "to solve a problem in the American administrative law context, use American administrative law tools" advice applies to correspondents in the US, as much as it does to those not watching an artifical political gong show featuring "debt ceiling" ballroom dancing 24x7. Eric

1 0