ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

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

Re: [ga] "Ongoing Programs" Mechanism

  • To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] "Ongoing Programs" Mechanism
  • From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 05:44:07 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=C8e1zHmz+h4hCaTCscoa3qOkkfhPT14f2dTJ2CBx/5Spd9hlIhaoG/TPtFAe9stReioLR1BDZhQcCLbrJOw4Guvqz40TckGoz7fk6JA7Lc5e/f7HS+AsK4uJE6JjJZ/bLEescrUYAD0c/IsIpuBa73v5RYeAEAOGti49IewVh88= ;
  • In-reply-to: <20051215140857.56687.qmail@web53507.mail.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sorry to burst yours and Karls' bubble (although i think Karl was writing in the abstract)
   
  The easy reason is that there has to be negotiations because ICANN says so. If you do not like that, get public support to change it. Otherwise, complain all you want, but, live with it. Should is usually a term used by those without power to explain what actions those in power "should" take. The only proper question here is "Why are there negotiations."
   
  e

Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Karl raises a very good point: "Why the ^%!~ should
there be "negotiations"?"

Why is there the presumption that new gTLDs will
necessarily require a contract? The DNS currently has
264 TLDs. ICANN has contracts only with 18 of those
sponsoring organizations. Over 93% of all TLD
sponsors have no contract with ICANN. 

One should also note that ICANN has no contract with
the sponsors of .edu, .mil, .int, or .gov.

Why then should a new gTLD sponsor be required to sign
a contract? Where is the community consensus that
this is a necessity? 

What if members of Civil Society decided to launch a
.SUCKS domain and told ICANN that they would not be
prepared to accept a contract? Would .SUCKS ever be
entered into the root? Would a failure to enter an
approved domain into the root owing to a lack of a
negotiated contract constitute restraint of trade?



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
  


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>