One of the resolutions the ICANN Board made on Friday may indicate that new gTLD’s applicants may have a LONG time before getting their extension.
The Resolution passed on Friday, entitled Consumer Choice, Competition and Innovation, said:
“Whereas, if and when new gTLDs have been in operation for one year, ICANN has committed to organize a review that will examine the extent to which the introduction or expansion of gTLDs has promoted competition, consumer trust and consumer choice.”
If and When.
Interesting.
Doesn’t sound like a done deal to me.
The actual resolution that passed was the following:
“Resolvedthe ICANN Board requests advice from the ALAC, GAC, GNSO and ccNSO on establishing the definition, measures, and three year targets for those measures, for competition, consumer trust and consumer choice in the context of the domain name system, such advice to be provided for discussion at the ICANN International Public meeting in San Francisco from 13-18 March 2011.”
If the advice of 4 organization are to be provided to the Board at the next meeting in March, how long will the Board take to digest such information?
Will they just listen to the advice much of which will be conflicting and then vote?
If and when.
MHB nicely done parseing the resolution for the detail that may emerge later and the cornerstones for future decisions.
my take is the board will now search for in between solutions:
– staggered launches (make the first guys pay more to get same dollars)
– a separation of the com substitutes (com2, web,online etc) that just add chaff to the web, with the sponsored and niche tlds (geos, groups, cultures).
– an auction model where one tld pays the most to be first, then picks their string, then the second high bidder picks their string.
– a “when and if” application process running parallel to the continued evaluation process.
even after each tld gets approved and then has the contracting process , (another chance to have terms changed) then they have the dept of commerce approval process, then the ombudsmen challenge, then maybe a court challenge.
my real fear is that the efforts spent in the new tlds process are taking up valuable time and resources from the other issues icann could be considering and will have to consider to keep the root system running smooth and to avoid future threats.
amongst all this the cctld system has evolved exactly as envisioned, and each country has the ability to grow and create businesses that IF they decide to be global become contenders to go after their .com
so my new take is segmenting applications, broad based are out, social and geo get delayed, and small niches that have the funding the to stick around and not make waves get a backdoor pass like travel, pro in 2003.
the others will make even more waves now to “force” icann to give out new tlds, which will just scare icann into more delays.
thanks for your coverage and in person reporting
page howe
The U.S. Government created ICANN
The ICANN legal structure is very similar to the U.S. Postal Service which many people do not realize is also a private corporation
When people are writing and predicting they might want to replace the term ICANN with [U.S. Postal Service] and imagine how things will play out. Other potential replacements would be [PBS] or [Corporation for Public Broadcasting].
Imagine people going on and on about PBS airing the NFL
Imagine people claiming that the [U.S. Postal Service] will have STAMPS with XXX pictures
The U.S. Government created ICANN. It would be best for the U.S. Government to step in at this point and tell people they have a plan to bring an end to the absurd structure.
There are many U.S. Government agencies (plus State agencies) that can collectively host BETTER (more reliable & secure) .COM infrastructure for Lower Cost.
The I* Eco.System experiment of having the private sector doing the government’s tasks has failed.
By the way, one of the king-pin founders of ICANN has been trying to make
that “experiment” work since the day he graduated from college. It was
apparently part of his academic thesis ? At one point, he and his college
cronies actually had the State of Rhode Island convinced to Out.Source [the
Government] to HIS private company. It was based on voodoo economic
studies, hocus pocus, and no concern about the potential corruption. At some
point the State of Rhode Island came to their senses, and said, “What were
we thinking?” Those fellows then moved on to the Whitehouse & ICANN.
People should be VERY CONCERNED – There are people who firmly believe that THEIR Corporations can replace government. THEY do not give up.
THEY are sure they are right.
======================
Since ICANN, THEY have moved on to Africa, Haiti and now NASA.
THEY move into the Kennedy Space Center, pay no attention to the billions
of dollars in “existing” infrastructure THEY leverage, and now launch private
rockets (for profit)…and declare they are Cosmonauts
======================
The I* Eco.System experiment of having the private sector doing the government’s tasks has failed.
…
Out.Source [the Government] to HIS private company.
…
Those fellows then moved on to the Whitehouse & ICANN.
I hope they never do it (and will cut some of the existing TLDs) but they will do it
so in what ways is the gac different from the us govt?
gac has the veto. tlds must pass gac approval. no matter what the process icann comes up with, nothing can happen until govt’s say it’s ok. and that’s not a process in which the geeks have much if any say.
forget about icann meetings (=all talk). maybe they are just a show for the geeks and wannabe geeks?
maybe the country representative who openly complained about having to attend icann meetings is giving the audience a hint. anything icann decides can be vetoed by the gac. so why have country reps chasing the icann circus across the globe?
another popular blogger who focuses on power relationships seems to understand this.
maybe the gac is where the icann fantasy meets the real world.
“so in what ways is the gac different from the us govt?”
===
The GAC with respect to ICANN has been and mostly is still an idle threat.
The GAC is lobbied by the big incumbent Registries to protect their cash cows.
That is partly done via FUD pointing at GAC member’s ccTLDs.
Very sophisticated psych-Ops (Black Ops) are used to distract the noob GAC.
The U.S. Government is a different animal. Uncle Sam has written contracts
with ICANN for the IANA Task. Those contracts descend from the Digital.DNA
of Academics and DOD contractors operating in very complex collusion.
More recent revelations apparently show, the ancient IANA Claims of Authority
were apparently made up, pulled from thin air.
If ICANN were being formed today, based on IANA DNA, apparently that
would have less of a chance of happening, because there was no real DNA.
There are some interesting (mostly audio) interviews of ICANN Founders
where they (Now) more openly admit…it was all made up. Fabricated BS
ICANN Board Resolutions Wiki Launched
by Denise Michel on December 13, 2010
Wondering how many resolutions ICANN’s Board of Directors approved on new gTLDs before this year? Researching historic ICANN Board actions on IPv6? Looking for the status of IDN ccTLD fast-track resolution implementation? Have we got a new tool for you!