Re: [ICANN-EU] New gTLD application procedure vs NSI network gouvernance

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

Dear Giorgio,
I thank you for your response which clarify things.

At 01:28 24/08/00, you wrote:
>You wrote
> > I a few months from now one of us could be among the people
> > receiving that complaint and having to respond or to act upon it.
> > I would like to have your feelings about
> > -  the ICANN application procedure complexity and pertinence
> > -  the NSI attitude in response
> > -  the interest of investing $100.000 into new TLDs under such
> >     circumstances.
> > knowing that your opinions will certainly be considered as in
> > part representative of the European concerned people.
> > Thank you for your response.
> > Jefsey Morfin
>
>Here are my answers:
>
>-  the ICANN application procedure complexity and pertinence
>If a company is allowed to make money by managing a gTLD I think we all
>agree this will be  _huge_  business.  Also I think that is indeed a
>questionable pratice to allow again to some people to walk around the world
>seeking for an unconnected isle (and which have his own sovereignity) and
>proposing them to manage their - yet to exist - ccTLD.( it is another way to
>put hands on a gTLD since it is easy to 'convert' a ccTLD to a gTLD by just
>dropping  restrictions). This has been done in real and there were no way to
>put almost financial stability trust controls in place.
>The procedure may seems complex and big but it is not dissimilar to public
>contest for providing a service (any kind of service and _big_ in terms of
>involved money) as I think you know are being handled in Europe.

I am not sure I understand your point. The application procedure has been
decided at the Yokohama meeting. The published text does not correspond
on several key issues to that published decision. The drift is from search of
inovative solutions to money making business assistance. The expectable
result is the end of the public root system as user's global root. I am quite
balanced on that issue as it will also be the end of the ccTLDs and a
reformation of the whole system, etc.

>-  the NSI attitude in response
>Market leaders dislike to lose their market positions and usually act in 
>order
>to regain their positions if they feel they were losing it.
>I have no wonder they will try to stay on the band-wagon on every possibile
>opportunity.

I was not suspecting that a candidate Director may accept easily such
an attitude in obvious violation of the ICANN interest. As a Member of a
ccTLD would you be aware of undisclosed agreements on the matter?
We hear so many things on so many people from more and more
authorized people....

>-  the interest of investing $100.000 into new TLDs under such
>    circumstances.
> >From the 'accounting'  point of view I think this amount is quite 
> negligible
>respect the whole business one.
>It is more appropriate to think it as a way to keep out 'noise' from the 
>'public
>contest'  rather  than a 'call for investment' .
>And this is another common pratice for _big_ businesses contests.

I feel reading Mike Roberts ! :-).

Did you realy read these documents? If yes give me a way to be sure
not to lose $100.000 minimum per application and to give your
concept, know how, etc... to competition? You may ask your
lawyer: ourselves we do not see....  I wish I could tell my Members
and partners in our project, here is how will make 1 penny with
this endeavor.

Good luck with this "selection" process.

>Best Regards
>Giorgio Griffini