[ga] What's the best thing for the GNSO to do?

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

>From "Next Steps for TLDs" by David R. Johnson and
Susan P. Crawford:

Excerpt:  

The newly formed GNSO should solidify its influence by
telling the Board to take action promptly to
rationalize the new TLD process. Rather than wading
into the taxonomic swamp of semantic meanings and
representativeness, or waiting for an endless and
fatally fuzzy "review" process to end, the GNSO should
tell the Board to: 

-- promptly facilitate the creation of minimum,
objective technical and financial criteria for
registry operators 

-- announce a technically-based upper limit for the
number of new TLDs to be added to the root each year
 
-- open up applications for new TLD operators
 
-- announce a schedule by which new TLDs (selected at
random from qualified applicants during any particular
period) will be recommended to the Department of
Commerce, and offer technically-based, lightweight
contracts to new and existing registry operators. 

Adoption by the Board of objective criteria for
qualification of new TLD registries would avoid
putting the Board in the position of making subjective
and highly charged choices among different parties
purporting to "represent" specified communities -- or
having to eliminate potential competition. The Board
should take into account the potential for controversy
regarding particular strings only when there is a
showing of likely harm. In the event of such a
showing, the Board might initially keep a particular
proposed TLD string on a reserved list, as a pragmatic
measure to avoid unnecessary controversy. 

Absent actual controversy and demonstrated harm, the
Board should allow diverse registries to create new
meanings in the marketplace and to build new
communities of registrants, rather than seeking to
predict market responses or prevent novel uses of the
DNS. 

The way to maximize ICANN's effectiveness, and the
value created by the DNS for existing and potential
markets, is to get back to basics. ICANN needs to
ensure that it is erecting the minimum possible
barriers to any financially and technically sound
business to seek to create new value. 

The internet itself was built because no one had to
get permission to proceed to try a new business model
or develop a new application. ICANN cannot lead the
market. It should simply get out of the way. As its
first action in the new year, the GNSO should tell the
Board that it is time to act constructively to open
the name space to all qualified providers.

http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/16/2048243&mode=thread

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