Re: [ga] Karl's comments at the 2003 Senate hearings on allocation systems

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Re:  "If a TLD fails, why should ICANN do anything
about it?"

ICANN Board member Mike Palage, in his Registry
Failure White Paper writes: 

"One of the important aspects to be considered in
connection with a gTLD registry failure is in the
impact on Internet stakeholders, most importantly
domain name registrants
within that TLD. Article 1 of the ICANN bylaws clearly
establish it?s role as a technical coordinating body,
and not a consumer protection agency.  Notwithstanding
these limitations, there are times in which policy
development reasonably and appropriately
related to these technical functions can intersect
with consumer protection, i.e. redemption grace
period, UDRP, etc."
http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-gtld-questions/pdfD95Qf6rJO1.pdf

One of the goals laid out in the White Paper was to
"provide accountability to and protection for the
international Internet community".  

I believe that ICANN, in its limited technical role,
can and should as a matter of policy offer protections
whenever possible.  It already extends protections to
trademark holders, it is contemplating additional
protections for IGOs, and has already provided the
basis for certain protections for registrants by way
of escrow provisioning requirements and domain
portability policies.

I agree with the DOC and the ICANN Board that a
registry failure constitutes a stability issue. 
Having a registry failover program in place occasions
no harm.  It is prudent.


--- sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> <snip>
> > On the other hand, I'm not willing to take the
> > cavalier attitude that if a registry fails it's
> not a
> > big deal (as invariably it's the registrants that
> will
> > be affected).
> 
> Why not?! Are you a Communist or something?!
> (sarcasm intended)
> 
> >
> > That said, I would be comfortable passing on the
> > business plan examination if I has assurances that
> > ICANN had developed a registry failover program.
> >
> > My policy recommendation:  To expedite the launch
> of
> > new gTLDs ICANN should eliminate registry
> financial
> > considerations as a selection criterion; to
> safeguard
> > the public interest ICANN should create a registry
> > failover program.
> 
> And what end would this failover program serve
> exactly?  If a TLD fails,
> why should ICANN do anything about it?  Why don't we
> just let the market
> decide, as Karl and Co. are proposing, and let the
> chips fall where they
> may? Or, Danny, do you mean that you want your cake
> but you want to eat it
> as well?
> 
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> ---
> 
> I was from Connecticut, whose Constitution declares
> "that all political
> power is inherent in the people, and all free
> governments are founded on
> their authority and instituted for their benefit;
> and that they have AT
> ALL TIMES an undeniable and indefeasible right to
> ALTER THEIR FORM OF
> GOVERNMENT in such a manner as they may think
> expedient.
>      --- A Connecticut Yankee by Twain, Mark
> 
> 


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