[ga] NC BS
Joop,
you say that in: "my experience with the people who have seriously participated" ..the.. "majority of individuals currently wishing to be engaged in ICANN and outside of the constituency structure are not consumers but producers of content, directly related to their Domain" ...with a subsequent "highly personal interest in a NAME, an identifier of themselves or their on-line business". But you reject the business constituency (BC) as not being able to represent their interests because it is "captured by big corporates". Forgive me if you have explained this before but I would like to know which values of the BC and positions adopted to date by the BC are not shared by such content-producing individuals who run businesses. Mission/values of the BC The core of the BC mission is to ensure that: - ICANN policy positions are consistent with the development of business via an Internet that is stable, secure and reliable while promoting consumer confidence, - ICANN policy positions derive from broad stakeholder participation in a common forum for suppliers and users. Is this mission NOT shared by individuals who run businesses ? Positions of the BC (edits from some published papers) 1. New names and trademarks The BC support an expansion in the gtLD name space. Do individuals not support this ? The BC seeks a way : "to meet the global desire for more names and reduce the potential for consumer fraud and confusion as a result of bad faith use of trademarks"... "Verify that applications for domain names do not infringe the rights of holders of intellectual property, trade marks or brand names of existing entities, whether commercial, non-commercial or individual." Do individuals want bad faith use of the names they use to trade ? The BC supports the UDRP and an efficient WhoIs? Are
these uniquely the concern of big business
?
2. Dot org
The BC "believes that an entity independent of VeriSign and free of all current and future contractual relations with VeriSign should become the dot org registry". "Dot org should remain an unrestricted domain but be marketed as a space for organisations." "Since the dot org registry will be a monopoly, consideration should be given to the advantages of a not-for-profit model." Are we so divergent here ? 3. At-large The BC supports the concept. Are we divergent here ? If there is divergence, lets identify it, and rationalise it.
Is divergence anything more than an
untested question over bad faith use of trademarks and business names ? If
so, which individual producer wants bad faith use of their own business name on
the internet?
Philip
|