+1 from me. I have not seen anyone on this list OPPOSED to new gTLDs, to keep saying comments, corrections, concerns, and questions about the program is not opposition. To keep saying folks here want to stop the program is fallacious. In reference to Wendy's comment about competition; competition in this market is an illusion while 5 Registrars control half the accreditations through shell companies. The unknown influence these Registrars have within ICANN is unchanged by policies set forth in the new gTLD program. If ICANN wants continued support of its agenda from At-Large, it needs to recognize At-Large's advice. If ALAC gets steamrolled during a critical phase like this it will get steamrolled on much smaller issues. It would be a mistake for the U.S. gov't to reassert control of the 'Net after approving privatization already, it's not going to happen and any statement by ALAC would not reverse the movement. This is about the organization keeping its promises. This is the letter from the US FTC chairman to ICANN issued on Friday: http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/publicltrs/111216letter-to-icann.pdf. It basically says what Evan is saying: advice has been ignored and promised protections have not been implemented. If one only listens to Kurt Pritz's testimony they might think that all outstanding questions have been addressed and this is why the program is moving forward on schedule. Clearly, this is not the whole story. -------------------------------------------------- From: "RJ Glass" <jipshida2@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:14 PM To: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org>; "NARALO Discussion List" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Notice of Motion: update to ALAC advice on gTLDs
2nd to your motion
________________________________ From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> To: NARALO Discussion List <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 1:34 PM Subject: [NA-Discuss] Notice of Motion: update to ALAC advice on gTLDs
Hello,
This message is to announce my intention to move this motion at the *JANUARY* ALAC meeting.
This is being done in order to enable discussion to take place -- within ALAC, its gTLD working group, and the RALOs -- to determine the response to this issue which has been IMO simmering throughout the At-Large community.
We are told by many (and officially by ICANN) that the program is set and we should stop complaining, But to refuse to express the point of view of the public interest within ICANN -- even if it is contrary to the predominant wisdom -- if to fail at the very basics of At-Large's bylaw-mandated role.
As one of the ALAC representatives for North America it is important for me to know the NARALO sentiment. As the proposer of this motion I guess my own point of view is laid bare; but if the region is mostly against it I will act accordingly.
- Evan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS end-users and governments have only been invited to participate in the new gTLD program long after its foundation principles were determined;
WHEREAS most of the problems identified by the ALAC in its Mexico City Summit declaration related to the new-gTLD program have not been satisfactorily addressed and indeed some have worsened;
WHEREAS numerous complaints from governments, intergovernmental organizations and other bodies have indicated that law enforcement and public-protection measures in the current design of the gTLD program are insufficient;
WHEREAS the ICANN Board, without explanation, has refused the cross-community endorsement of the Joint Applicant Support Working Group recommendations to reduce costs of new gTLD in developing economies independent of any fixed fund;
WHEREAS the absence of a staggered release schedule or a fixed timetable for future rounds severely inhibits ICANN's ability to correct mistakes in the proposed application round;
and
WHEREAS ICANN has still not convincingly demonstrated the end-user need or benefit of a simultaneous launch of hundreds of new TLDs;
RESOLVED THAT the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) convey to the ICANN Board and community the dissatisfaction of At-Large with the new gTLD program in its current form, and explicitly advises that its implementation would be harmful to the public interest. We request that implementation of the program be suspended until necessary public-interest modifications are implemented. ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------ ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------