ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] NTIA tells ICANN that new TLDs plan is unacceptable

  • To: GNSO GA Mailing List <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] NTIA tells ICANN that new TLDs plan is unacceptable
  • From: Andy Gardner <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 18:54:37 -0600

Summarising the letter:


On 02/12/2010, at 6:10 PM, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hi folks,
> Everyone should read the comments from the NTIA made today:
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/5gtld-guide/msg00013.html
> to see that the new TLDs plan by ICANN is not realistic. The 2008 letter that 
> they reference is at:
> http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_081218.pdf
> which I of course discussed in my original comments (I've made several 
> since). 
> You can see all the comments so far at:
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/5gtld-guide/index.html
> ICANN as an organization should be listening to folks like myself who've made 
> thoughtful suggestions, rather than listen to those trying to "game" the 
> system. 
> NTIA certainly listens to our comments and concerns, and NTIA is ICANN's 
> boss. 
> Did ICANN really think that the ultimate "call" on this issue was theirs to 
> make? LOL
> Obviously NTIA has proven they have a superior understanding of what the 
> public 
> wants, and it will be a short "leap" from that to the natural conclusion that 
> it's time to end the IANA contract --- outsourcing the important function to 
> ICANN has proven to be a failed experiment, given that ICANN simply serves a 
> small cabal of "insiders", rather than the broader public. ICANN has a short 
> window to change that outcome. It can start by placing the new TLDs program 
> on 
> indefinite hold until the proper economic studies are performed, AND once the 
> *optimal* strategy (like our Ascended TLDs proposal, or Fixed Tenders, etc.) 
> is 
> identified that serves consumers.
> Sincerely,
> George Kirikos
> 416-588-0269
> http://www.leap.com/

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>