[comments-dotorg] Re: Chris Bailey's posting on a Sponsored, Unrestricted Domain

["Pruett, Duncan" <duncan.pruett@icftu.org>]

It is important to note that it remain possible in principle, in the
proposed model (sponsored & unrestricted), for the sponsoring organisation
to retain the right to make stipulations with regard to the practices of the
registrar. If .org is to be "re-purposed", that change of purpose will have
to manifest itself somewhere in the eyes of registrants. The main interface
between registrants and the entities involved in running the TLD business is
the registrar. It is clear that the new "purpose" or "identity" manifest
itself in one way or other through the registrar. The identity might, for
example, be certain guidelines on the way .org is marketed - a stipulation
that someone looking for a .com name is not automatically offered the same
string in .org just because it is available, for example). 

I assume that this would never work as a "gentlemen's agreement", and that
it can only be achieved and enforced by making it part of the registrar
agreement.

The ICFTU has a particular concern on this issue, because when one day (we
live in hope!) the new TLD process is eventually re-opened, and the ".union"
proposal is reviewed (The Reconsideration Committee repeatedly made this
observation earlier in the year: "All of the proposals not selected remain
pending, and those submitting them will certainly have the option to have
them considered if and when additional TLD selections are made."), we will
be proposing, as we did before, that the sponsoring organisation of ".union"
have the following responsibility:

"The responsibility, on behalf of the community represented, to specify that
providers selected to provide registry or registrar services in the TLD
fully respect the right of workers to join trade unions and to engage in
collective bargaining, and moreover, that they have an open and positive
attitude to worker self-organisation."

It would not surprise me if other proposed sponsored TLDs in the future
(restricted or unrestricted) quite justifiably reserve the right to require
certain policies to be in place at the level of the registrar. These
requirements might be ethical considerations (not something which is
required of all organisations selling ".com" domains perhaps), or they might
be related to the values of the community that a TLD is being set up to
serve.

In light of the above remarks, I support Chris Bailey's posting.

Duncan Pruett

__________________

Duncan Pruett
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
Tel: +32 (2) 224 0219
http://www.icftu.org


-----Original Message-----

We the undersigned all support the proposal by the .org TLD taskforce that 
.org should become a Sponsored, Unrestricted Domain.

We believe .org should be run by a Sponsoring Organisation that relates to 
and emphasises with the non-commercial sector. Like the other sponsored 
TLDs, it should produce a "Registrar Agreement" designed to ensure that 
.org Registrars also do and that they comply with plans to develop .org as 
a uniquely non-commercial namespace.

Chris Bailey, Association for Progressive Communications
Duncan Pruett, International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
Manon Ress, Essential Information
Rick Weingarten, American Library Association
Adam Peake, GLOCOM Tokyo