Re: [ga] FW: Comment from the gTLD Registry Constituency

["Peter Dengate Thrush" <barrister@chambers.gen.nz>]

This has to be one of the most inaccurate postings in recent memory.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Neuman, Jeff" <
trims
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 5:36 AM
Subject: RE: [ga] FW: Comment from the gTLD Registry Constituency


> Thanks Elizabeth, we do recognize the difference at Neustar.  However, we
> also recognize that there are certain issues that should be considered
> "global policy issues" and for these it is more appropriate to have a
global
> body, like the ICANN, to provide that forum than to rely on just the local
> community.  A few examples of these types of issues include (1) Grace
> Periods, (2) Transfers, (3) Escrow, (4) Dispute Resolution Policies, and
(5)
> Uniform Deletion Periods, etc.
>
>

For any one to seriously regard these as issues which a cctld is going to
regard as not entirely matters of local law is sadly out of synch. with
reality.

There is nothing -not even the existence (or not) of any of these which
necessarily has the slightest to do with ICANN. They are all operational
requirements within the local law.

Some -perhaps all of these - might be adopted by a local cctld if its people
believe they want them (Most in fact have them) But to suggest that its an
ICANN issue whether we in NZ (for example) even have a policy on escrow is
quite misguided.

Say it after me: IT IS NOT ICANN"S JOB TO MANAGE THE CCTLDs.

If a cctld is run "badly", it is not ICANN's job to make it run to its
definition of "well".

If a cctld wants to run with out escrow -whatever I or you may think of
that -that is its choice.

It does not derive permission to run the cctld from ICANN. ICANN merely
manages the IANA database which records who the manager is. Crucial
distinction from the gtlds.

It has nothing to do with ICANN - with technical coordination of domain
names, if, in a country, there were no provision for resolving complaints of
cybersquatting. How can it possibly be  of any concern to the technical
stability of the net if  trade mark owners were arguably losing rights
because others were registering their brands as domain names?

Either those trade mark owners have remedies under the local law - or they
don't, and nothing about ICANN or cctld management can have anything to do
with it.

Other responsible for Mr Neuman need to understand how damaging this kind of
foolishness is.

The potential for creating a place where the advisability of these issues
can be discussed, where experience can be shared, and common practices
voluntarily adopted for the common good will be quite lost.

Count up how many countries have signed contracts with ICANN.  Ever wonder
why even countries like Canada, Mexico, France, Korea  and the Netherlands,
all of whom have had citizens on the ICANN board are missing from the list?

Regards
Peter Dengate Thrush
Senior Vice Chair
Asia Pacific TLD Association
ccAdcom Meeting Chair

Peter Dengate Thrush
Senior Vice Chair
Asia Pacific TLD Association

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html