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

[Alf Hansen <aha@uninett.no>]

Jefsrey,

I will try to add some more valye....

When you decided to pay $ 100.000 you knew the risks. If you thought the
risk was too high, you should not register as a sponsor and you should
not pay. You made a decision to invest, perhaps because you believe in
your consept.

Now you mistrust ICANN because you think they are not handling your
application in a correct way.

Of course you are free to do that, and I can understand your feelings
about this since you have spent a lot of money. But if you did not trust
ICANN in the first place, you should not have invested.

Yes, you may lose your money, but you knew that from the start. It was a
calculated risk.

By involving ourselves (At-Large) also in in the Board, we can try our
best to understand what is going on inside ICANN, and try our best to
ensure fair treatment. 


Jefsey Morfin wrote:
...
> 
> I am demanded $100.000 to give away two concepts without any IP
> protection, with the thread to be removed their management anytime
> an unkown decision maker on unknown grounds will decide it and to
> see them used by larger than me to kill my subsequent business,
> since I am first a user with common-to-be needs. I do not see any
> way to make a for sure a single penny in this endeavor.
> 
> For this I must also spend a lot of time and a lot of money more.
> 
> The result is that I am ready to propose unlimited domain names
> numbers at $ 2500 per year, free for non profite and caritatives.
> The proposition will be most probably taken over by an operator
> in the meanwhile with the blessing of NSI who will sell it to you
> $20 a piece after discount.
> 
> This can only lead to one thing: I will start operations out of the
> a-root or as ULD and spend my money in blocking the ICANN
> process to lock competition out through legal actions with others
> and in making some joint advrtizing through the press to launch
> my services.
> 
> Is this realy that you want? I am not sure it is common interest...
> 
> >Have you read http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-criteria-15aug00.htm ? After
> >a quick read I think it is quite good, and the criteria seem to be
> >promoting a process where the applicants and ICANN together via
> >negotiations can develop  how new gTLDs can be established.
> 
> Just imagine yourself as the ".gnu" applicant. Would you spend
> time reading it, filling it with two lawyers, detailing your operations
> to competition through ICANN (again no NDA, no protection, to
> the contrary you sign you abandon any IP on your ideas, know
> how, etc..)
> 
> >Using the market mechanism in this case can be a way to determine the
> >"best" ideas for the developments of the new TLDs. However, I am not
> >sure if this mechanism alone is "best" for the users/consumers. If we
> >trust that ICANN "takes care of that in the negoitiations", we can
> >relax. But can we?
> 
> What do you qualify as "best" when the best will be the one which
> should result in the maximum number of duplicate registrations at the
> highest acceptable rate. Shop, Banc, Sex ?

What I think is "best", is that the TLDs should really mean something.
If I have company I shold not need to register my domain under both
.com, .net, .org and .int, etc. I should register under the TLD where I
belong, under a gTLD or under a ccTLD. The search engines and the
WWW-portals will be the tools for end-users to find what they are
looking for, the domain name structure is not "yellow pages".

Yes, I know that domain names are extensively used as "labels" for good
and bad products and organizations. The end-users (customers) are
intelligent people, and they will not go automatichly to travel.com
whenever they are bying a train ticket. They will go to the URLs which
they know by experience are offering the good products they want, and
with the best service and price. The quality of the product and service
is much more important than the domain name.

Internet for the end user is (among other things) a veichle to order
good products and services as if the whole world was available in the
shop next door. End users will not access domain names with bad
reputation, even if the domain name itself is very good.

There will continue be a long list of famous URLs (and thereby domain
names), faumous because the products and services are good, not because
the domain names themselves are good. 

> 
> >With a strong representation from At-Large in the ICANN Board, I think
> >we can.
> 
> If he has a string commitment at representing the interest of the
> millions of users, not those of the 18 Directors, the Staff and the
> Lawyers. I have nothing against people trying to make a good job
> and making money at it. But I am not convinced that the ICANN
> does a good job there. I am even sure it does a so poor job that
> one way or another it will not survive these two selections
> processes (new Directors and new TLDs). Hence my concern
> because this will delay everyone.

I agree that as long as we have "selected" Directors and not "elected",
there will be a lot of mistrust. But the world is moving forward. After
a while all of them will be "elected" and the ICANN bootstrap process
has finished the first phase.

> 
> Best regards.
> Jefsey Morfin

Best regards,
-- 
Alf Hansen           Mail address:
                        UNINETT FAS A/S
                        N-7465 Trondheim, Norway
aha@uninett.no       Phone: +47 73 55 79 00
                     Fax:   +47 73 55 79 01