"What's At Stake" gTLD conference
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference? http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/ It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large. As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event: http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/ ... boo hoo. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
I really liked the idea that ICANN announce now when it will have the next open application window as a way to take pressure off this round. The "now or never" idea that a lot of consultants and back-end registries are pitching is both factually wrong and, I think, detrimental to the process. Scaring people into operating Internet infrastructure won't be good for anyone, including the company that receives the delegation of something it wasn't really sure it wanted anyway. "Now or never" also will substantially increase the number of applications, which will complicate the evaluation and launch process. I'd like to see ICANN announce now that it will open another application window in January, 2013. That would give the companies sitting on the fence comfort that they won't be left out, and we all will be able to see whether what comes out of this first round is worth emulating. My expectation is that after seeing what new TLDs really look like, with all of their complexities and expenses, some of the companies now thinking of how to do this will decide not to pursue it at all. For the undecided, I think it's better to watch and learn than to learn while operating a registry. Bret On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference?
http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/
It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large.
As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event: http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/ ... boo hoo.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ 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 ------
Bret I've been hearing the same thing from quite a few people - including potential applicants for this round. Personally I'd hate to see the good and positive aspects of new Tlds being overshadowed by FUD being touted as "advice" by some of the new tld crowd Regards Michele Mr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity On 20 Oct 2011, at 21:35, "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@internet.law.pro> wrote:
I really liked the idea that ICANN announce now when it will have the next open application window as a way to take pressure off this round. The "now or never" idea that a lot of consultants and back-end registries are pitching is both factually wrong and, I think, detrimental to the process. Scaring people into operating Internet infrastructure won't be good for anyone, including the company that receives the delegation of something it wasn't really sure it wanted anyway. "Now or never" also will substantially increase the number of applications, which will complicate the evaluation and launch process.
I'd like to see ICANN announce now that it will open another application window in January, 2013. That would give the companies sitting on the fence comfort that they won't be left out, and we all will be able to see whether what comes out of this first round is worth emulating. My expectation is that after seeing what new TLDs really look like, with all of their complexities and expenses, some of the companies now thinking of how to do this will decide not to pursue it at all. For the undecided, I think it's better to watch and learn than to learn while operating a registry.
Bret
On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference?
http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/
It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large.
As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event: http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/ ... boo hoo.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ 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 ------
FUD sucks and hurts everyone and there's far too much of it in this industry. On the other hand, ignoring reality isn't very helpful either. Looking at the realities of ICANN's processes, the studies that the GAC wants done *after* all new TLDs have been in operation for a while, etc. -- what do people here think is a reasonable estimate for when Round 2 happens? I'm asked by potential clients, "When will we see Round 2"? What should I answer? I don't say "now or never," but I do tell them I don't think we'll see a new round for at least a few years -- which is my honest best guess. Furthermore, if they have a common trademark like "United," a competing application from another "united" trademark holder is perfectly possible in this round. If they have a coined, unique name like "Xerox" then they can easily wait for Round 2 or 3 or whenever. So the impetus to apply in this round is different for different brand holders. Antony On Oct 20, 2011, at 1:57 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
Bret
I've been hearing the same thing from quite a few people - including potential applicants for this round.
Personally I'd hate to see the good and positive aspects of new Tlds being overshadowed by FUD being touted as "advice" by some of the new tld crowd
Regards
Michele
Mr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel
Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity
On 20 Oct 2011, at 21:35, "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@internet.law.pro> wrote:
I really liked the idea that ICANN announce now when it will have the next open application window as a way to take pressure off this round. The "now or never" idea that a lot of consultants and back-end registries are pitching is both factually wrong and, I think, detrimental to the process. Scaring people into operating Internet infrastructure won't be good for anyone, including the company that receives the delegation of something it wasn't really sure it wanted anyway. "Now or never" also will substantially increase the number of applications, which will complicate the evaluation and launch process.
I'd like to see ICANN announce now that it will open another application window in January, 2013. That would give the companies sitting on the fence comfort that they won't be left out, and we all will be able to see whether what comes out of this first round is worth emulating. My expectation is that after seeing what new TLDs really look like, with all of their complexities and expenses, some of the companies now thinking of how to do this will decide not to pursue it at all. For the undecided, I think it's better to watch and learn than to learn while operating a registry.
Bret
On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference?
http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/
It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large.
As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event: http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/ ... boo hoo.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ 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 ------
------ 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 ------
It's seeming highly likely that numerous issues -- notably the issue of applicant support in developing countries -- may demand a committment to multiple rounds. The ICANN Board committed at the last meeting to establishing a fund -- and seeding that fund with $2M -- for this purpose. Notwithstanding community (ie, GNSO, GAC and ALAC, expressed through the JAS WG report) concerns about the validity of this as an effective tactic, it exists as a commitment. And there is no way on earth that an independent foundation to administer such a fund could be enabled in time to form and have its personnel, structure and funding ready for this winter's round. So one may discern that event back in Singapore, the Board envisioned a subsequent round while it enabled this one. Plenty of details and community fedeback is left TBD, but the collective mindset of the Board seemed clear. Timing? No clue. I'm quite happy with "it's ready when it's ready", a theme that has driven most Internet innovation these days. - Evan PS: Having worked deeply in the Linux community during the height of Microsoft's intense opposition to anything open source, I think I have a well developed sense of the difference between FUD, legitimate concern and petty rumor-mongering. Little of what we've seen here is FUD, and it's no surprise that different advisors offer different advice. Indeed, these days I'm far more concerned with reverse-FUD (ratings agencies saying everything is fine when indeed there SHOULD be fear) than the original. On 20 October 2011 17:10, Antony Van Couvering <avc@avc.vc> wrote:
FUD sucks and hurts everyone and there's far too much of it in this industry. On the other hand, ignoring reality isn't very helpful either.
Looking at the realities of ICANN's processes, the studies that the GAC wants done *after* all new TLDs have been in operation for a while, etc. -- what do people here think is a reasonable estimate for when Round 2 happens?
I'm asked by potential clients, "When will we see Round 2"? What should I answer?
I don't say "now or never," but I do tell them I don't think we'll see a new round for at least a few years -- which is my honest best guess. Furthermore, if they have a common trademark like "United," a competing application from another "united" trademark holder is perfectly possible in this round. If they have a coined, unique name like "Xerox" then they can easily wait for Round 2 or 3 or whenever. So the impetus to apply in this round is different for different brand holders.
Antony
On Oct 20, 2011, at 1:57 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
Bret
I've been hearing the same thing from quite a few people - including potential applicants for this round.
Personally I'd hate to see the good and positive aspects of new Tlds being overshadowed by FUD being touted as "advice" by some of the new tld crowd
Regards
Michele
Mr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel <http://blacknight.tel/>
Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity
On 20 Oct 2011, at 21:35, "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@internet.law.pro> wrote:
I really liked the idea that ICANN announce now when it will have the next open application window as a way to take pressure off this round. The "now or never" idea that a lot of consultants and back-end registries are pitching is both factually wrong and, I think, detrimental to the process. Scaring people into operating Internet infrastructure won't be good for anyone, including the company that receives the delegation of something it wasn't really sure it wanted anyway. "Now or never" also will substantially increase the number of applications, which will complicate the evaluation and launch process.
I'd like to see ICANN announce now that it will open another application window in January, 2013. That would give the companies sitting on the fence comfort that they won't be left out, and we all will be able to see whether what comes out of this first round is worth emulating. My expectation is that after seeing what new TLDs really look like, with all of their complexities and expenses, some of the companies now thinking of how to do this will decide not to pursue it at all. For the undecided, I think it's better to watch and learn than to learn while operating a registry.
Bret
On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference?
http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/
It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large.
As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event:
http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/
... boo hoo.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ 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 ------
------ 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 ------
At this point there's a bum's rush to get cities online. (As well as everyone else, .lowenhaupt for only 500K <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114753028665775786510/posts/BRupnoLpzqD> how can I resist!) In the instance of New York City, there appears to have been little serious preparation for the process by city government <http://connectingnyc.org/tick-tock/>. Yet hubris demands that Paris, Berlin, London... not get there before us. The ICANN hasn't prepared cities for optimizing this Critical Internet Resource. Nor have the nation-states. For city bureaucrats its been a hurry up and wait <http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/hurry+up+and+wait> game that's been developed around the globe in 41 venues over 13 years, leaving the city off guard. "We'll pay serious attention when the deadline arises." was the reasonable response I received from an overworked city bureaucrat last year. Events like "What's At Stake" provide one more reason to procrastinate - "Is it really happening?" Now, with no time to think through the potentials - it took 3 years to put the Commissioners Plan of 1811 together that set up Manhattan's street grid - we should not be surprised when carelessness, chicanery, and cronyism result. What's to be done? I recently suggested to a leading registry operator that cities should be able to submit an "intention to file" along with the requisite check, enabling them to complete a baseline study <http://www.coactivate.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/from-darpa-to-carpa> and make optimum use of this critical Internet resource. "Can't be done. They'd need to make exceptions for everyone else. Unfair." I know some on this list have expressed a "TLDs and cities, what a waste" attitude. And there are too many important issues for At-Large to give them all their due. And I sometimes suspect I'm the only list participant with city planning / operations / governance experience - if that's the case outreach is required (last I checked cities are home to more than 1/2 the human race.) So let me make another plea: Please At-large, will you take a look at the situation with cities and TLDs? Will you help provide the time and structure so that a reasoned plan for city-TLDs can be developed? Will you help organize a study of the potentials of TLDs providing a digital grid for city resources? We can blame city administrators, ICANN, GAC, and lots of others for the situation. But it's the city residents - the old, the young, the healthy, the weak - who will be the real losers if At-Large doesn't act. It's the At-Large that represents the cities and its residents at ICANN, not the GNSO. It just seems so wasteful to allow this resource to be squandered. I hope you find the resources to step-up on this issue. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt ----------------------------------------------- Thomas Lowenhaupt, Founder & Chair Connecting.nyc Inc. tom@connectingnyc.org <mailto:tom@connectingnyc.org> Jackson Hts., NYC 11372 718 639 4222 Blog <http://www.coactivate.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/blog/> - Wiki <http://www.coactivate.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/project-home> -Web <http://www.connectingnyc.org/> On 10/20/2011 6:23 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
It's seeming highly likely that numerous issues -- notably the issue of applicant support in developing countries -- may demand a committment to multiple rounds. The ICANN Board committed at the last meeting to establishing a fund -- and seeding that fund with $2M -- for this purpose. Notwithstanding community (ie, GNSO, GAC and ALAC, expressed through the JAS WG report) concerns about the validity of this as an effective tactic, it exists as a commitment. And there is no way on earth that an independent foundation to administer such a fund could be enabled in time to form and have its personnel, structure and funding ready for this winter's round. So one may discern that event back in Singapore, the Board envisioned a subsequent round while it enabled this one. Plenty of details and community fedeback is left TBD, but the collective mindset of the Board seemed clear. Timing? No clue. I'm quite happy with "it's ready when it's ready", a theme that has driven most Internet innovation these days. - Evan PS: Having worked deeply in the Linux community during the height of Microsoft's intense opposition to anything open source, I think I have a well developed sense of the difference between FUD, legitimate concern and petty rumor-mongering. Little of what we've seen here is FUD, and it's no surprise that different advisors offer different advice. Indeed, these days I'm far more concerned with reverse-FUD (ratings agencies saying everything is fine when indeed there SHOULD be fear) than the original. On 20 October 2011 17:10, Antony Van Couvering <avc@avc.vc> wrote:
FUD sucks and hurts everyone and there's far too much of it in this industry. On the other hand, ignoring reality isn't very helpful either. Looking at the realities of ICANN's processes, the studies that the GAC wants done *after* all new TLDs have been in operation for a while, etc. -- what do people here think is a reasonable estimate for when Round 2 happens? I'm asked by potential clients, "When will we see Round 2"? What should I answer? I don't say "now or never," but I do tell them I don't think we'll see a new round for at least a few years -- which is my honest best guess. Furthermore, if they have a common trademark like "United," a competing application from another "united" trademark holder is perfectly possible in this round. If they have a coined, unique name like "Xerox" then they can easily wait for Round 2 or 3 or whenever. So the impetus to apply in this round is different for different brand holders. Antony On Oct 20, 2011, at 1:57 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
Bret I've been hearing the same thing from quite a few people - including potential applicants for this round. Personally I'd hate to see the good and positive aspects of new Tlds being overshadowed by FUD being touted as "advice" by some of the new tld crowd Regards Michele Mr. Michele Neylon Blacknight http://Blacknight.tel <http://blacknight.tel/> Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity On 20 Oct 2011, at 21:35, "Bret Fausett" <bfausett@internet.law.pro> wrote:
I really liked the idea that ICANN announce now when it will have the next open application window as a way to take pressure off this round. The "now or never" idea that a lot of consultants and back-end registries are pitching is both factually wrong and, I think, detrimental to the process. Scaring people into operating Internet infrastructure won't be good for anyone, including the company that receives the delegation of something it wasn't really sure it wanted anyway. "Now or never" also will substantially increase the number of applications, which will complicate the evaluation and launch process. I'd like to see ICANN announce now that it will open another application window in January, 2013. That would give the companies sitting on the fence comfort that they won't be left out, and we all will be able to see whether what comes out of this first round is worth emulating. My expectation is that after seeing what new TLDs really look like, with all of their complexities and expenses, some of the companies now thinking of how to do this will decide not to pursue it at all. For the undecided, I think it's better to watch and learn than to learn while operating a registry. Bret On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:36 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference? http://www.cadna.org/Whats-At-Stake/ It seems like a very useful approach with which we might want to associate ourselves. Yes, much of it involves major brandholders scared by the influx of gTLDs, but it seems that there is much common ground between that group's skepticism about the program and that of ICANN At-Large. As one example of how this may be interesting, apparently gTLD consultants are unwelcome at the event: http://domainincite.com/whats-at-stake-conference-bans-new-gtld-consultants/
... boo hoo. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56 ------ 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 ------ ------ 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 ------ ------ 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 ------
I've written asking if I can webcast. Will let you know if I get a response. j On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Is anyone from NARALO going to this conference?
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- -
participants (6)
-
Antony Van Couvering -
Bret Fausett -
Evan Leibovitch -
Joly MacFie -
Michele Neylon :: Blacknight -
Thomas Lowenhaupt