[ga] Re: Proposal: Establishing a Registrant Advisory Committee

[Peter Dengate Thrush <barrister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Danny,

On 18/02/2008, at 8:59 AM, Danny Younger wrote:

> Peter,
>
> I write to you prior to the upcoming budget cycle with
> a proposed solution to enhance ICANN efficiencies.
>
> The overarching goal of the ICANN structural and
> operational review cycle has been to ensure that the
> ICANN board receive the best possible qualitative and
> timely advice from members of the community on vexing
> issues that require an organizational response.

Actually, I don't agree that this is the overarching goal; the board  
does not seek advice from members of the community in this fashion,  
nor for that purpose.
The policy making and coordinating, which is our major function, is  
done via the SO's.
The board's interest in that "timely advice" is in seeing that it is  
fed into the policy-making processes, which, as you know, we do not  
want to be happening at the Board.

> While ICANN has numerous advisory committees and
> supporting organizations whose responsibilities
> include putting forth the general registrant interest
> as a part of their duties, the sad reality has been
> that immediate registrant concerns rarely find a
> dedicated organizational advocate to spearhead policy
> development activities.
>
> What is needed is an Advisory Body whose "sole focus"
> is upon the needs of the general registrant community
> whose funds support and drive the ICANN process.
This may be a useful development.
I should need to see it carefully distinguished, with advantages and  
disadvantages laid out and contested
between the current user groups ( Business and Non Commercial  
constituencies of GNSO), and the At Large
I appreciate that registrants are not, as a group,necessarily a  
subset of "user", or of At Large, as it includes the domaineers who  
are registrants for trading and profit - is it their interests in  
particular that you feel are not being served by the current structure?



> Accordingly, I ask you and your peers on the board to
> consider the establishment of a Registrant Advisory
> Committee.  The registrant community needs a strong
> advocate in their corner, and ICANN needs a continued
> focus on general registrant issues.

I assume that you are limiting this interest group to registrants of  
some, or possibly all gTLDs?

You will know that ccTLD registrants rights are not a matter for the  
ICANN board.
And, I assume, the smaller chartered TLDs like .museum are not going  
to require this group.
Nor can I see much intersection with the registrants of .asia or .eu.


I wonder if your real focus should be the registrar contracts?

The real way forward, as you know, is not for a letter to the board  
with an idea, but to set about self forming such a group, to clarify  
its membership, and goals.
A clear cost benefit analysis is also required - what precisely is  
the harm that this is intended to remedy?

This is the bottom-up process which characterized the formation of  
the existing constituencies
Once this has some momentum from the ground-up, with greater clarity  
of purpose, we could look at it further.

Regards


Peter



> You can make this happen, and ICANN will benefit from
> such a contribution.
>
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
>
>
>        
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> ______________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/ 
> newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Peter Dengate Thrush
barrister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx