Public participation site

ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé was already 2 hours into his flight from Singapore to Paris when the pilot's voice interrupted the in-flight entertainment.

A tech problem meant turning back, landing in Singapore, waiting for another plane and starting the long haul again!

Half a day later, Chehadé landed in Paris.

He'd already missed a lunch appointment but was still in time to make a reception organised at French ICANN board member Sébastien Bachollet's initiative. Chehadé gave a speech there to help spread the word about ICANN to the local community, before speeding off to the Unesco building in the center of Paris.

This was the venue for the WSIS+10 meeting, held from Monday to Wednesday this week.

Now you and I would have been straight off to the hotel to sleep off that nightmare flight. But not Chehadé! He kept to his commitments and looked none the worse for wear when the next day, addressing a packed room II (one of the largest) at the Unesco building, he delivered one of his trademark impassioned speeches to the WSIS+10 delegates.

"Multi Stakeholderism is the only way. But it has to be equal Multi Stakeholderism, where every stakeholder has an equal place. Academia, civil society, industry, users and yes… even governments… they all have a part to play," he said in a humorous nod to his government-heavy audience.

As soon as the speech was over, Chehadé sped off to another Bachollet-inspired meeting. This time at the office of the French Prime Minister.

All this only a day after he'd walked the walk in Asia by announcing the creation of two regional ICANN hubs, one in Singapore and the other in Istanbul. And that he'd be leading by example and relocating to Singapore for a third of the year!

Four months after officially starting as CEO, Chehadé obviously eats, drinks and breathes ICANN all day long. His enthusiasm and energy seem as infectious as they are limitless, whilst his people skills are second-to-none.

And perhaps most importantly, he speaks to people in their own language rather than imposing ICANN's. Literally. In Singapore, Chehadé highlighted his Asian origins (well Beirut is technically in Asia, isn't it?). In Paris, he spoke French at his off-the-plane reception. In Africa, he will remind people of his links with the continent (his parents were Egyptian).

In short, Chehadé is open, engaged and engaging. He is also truly international and respectful of differences in culture, ideology and opinions.

If the ICANN CEO is like that, chances are ICANN itself will benefit. Now I know us ICANN community members are not used to optimism, but perhaps it's time to put aside our cynicism and recognise that if the guy at the top can push those values, then maybe in time ICANN itself can adopt them…

Written by Stéphane Van Gelder, Chairman, STEPHANE VAN GELDER CONSULTING

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: ICANN, Internet Governance

If you are a new gTLD applicant, or if you follow ICANN, or if you just like being in a constant state of confusion, then the recent barrage of ICANN activity has probably been enough to make your head spin. Let's take a look at what we have hurtling towards us, like an out-of-control asteroid, in the next month:

March 5 – Public Interest Commitment (PICs) Due

If you are a new gTLD applicant, then you have been asked to indicate which parts of your application you will incorporate into the registry agreement as binding commitments, or to identify additional commitments that are not part of your application but which you intend to incorporate as a binding commitment into the registry agreement. To muddy the waters, ICANN has clearly stated that you are not required to submit a Public Interest Specification, if you do not wish to incorporate a binding commitment into the registry agreement. But in a recent letter from the NTIA, ALL applicants are encouraged to participate.

March 13 – New gTLD Formal Objection Period Closes

Of course we don't have important information from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), or even know whether the applications have passed Initial Evaluation, but let's not let that stop us from being forced to file Formal Objections.

March 14 – Reply Period on Policy v. Implementation Closes

Undoubtedly, it is a little concerning that ICANN cannot delineate between what is "Policy" and what is "Implementation" — but at least they are asking for feedback from the Community to help drive discussions scheduled to occur at the ICANN meeting in Beijing.

March 20 – Reply Period on Revised New gTLD Registry Agreement Including Additional Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specification Closes

As the PIC Specifications are to have been submitted well-ahead of this date, not sure what purpose these comments will serve. That said, the proposed new gTLD registry contract has already received harsh criticism from a number of Community members during the initial comment period. It isn't clear how ICANN will move forward in the face of such clear opposition.

March 26 – Trademark Clearinghouse Begins Accepting Submissions

Assuming that the Trademark Clearinghouse is accepting submissions by March 26, ICANN will have delivered on its promise that it would be launched in Q1, 2013 — barely. Will it work as expected? That remains to be seen, as some implementation details are still being ironed-out.

Is That All?

And if all of this isn't enough to track, don't forget to be on the lookout for: guidance from the GAC which has now been delayed according to a recent announcement, updates from the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services and the Accountability and Transparency Review Team, published list of new gTLD contention sets and who knows what else. Oh, and if you're a new gTLD Applicant, don't forget to answer those Clarifying Questions.

Written by Elisa Cooper, Director of Product Marketing at MarkMonitor

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: ICANN, Top-Level Domains

ICANN is looking to set up two new hubs in Singapore and Istanbul to serve the Asia-Pacific, and Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) markets. "Asia has not been well-embraced by ICANN in the past. We owe Asia a big apology," Fadi Chehade, CEO of the organization responsible for administrating the world's Web traffic, said in an interview with ZDNet. Prior to his visit in the city-state, Chehade said he had been travelling this week to China, South Korea, and Japan to share how ICANN planned to grow its Asian presence.

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: ICANN

Kevin Murphy reporting in Domain Incite: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration said today that all new gTLD applicants, even those that have not already been hit by government warnings, should submit Public Interest Commitments to ICANN.

In a rare comment sent to an ICANN public forum today, the NTIA suggested that applicants should use the process to help combat counterfeiting and piracy. ... NTIA said that applicants should pay special attention in their PICs to helping out the "creative sector".

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: ICANN, Internet Governance, Policy & Regulation, Top-Level Domains

Lesotho IXP setup. Photo Credit: ISOC/Michuki MwangiThe Internet Society today announced that it has been awarded a grant by Google.org to extend its Internet exchange point (IXP) activities in emerging markets. The grant will build on the Internet Society's previous efforts and will establish a methodology to assess IXPs, provide training for people to operate the IXPs, and build a more robust local Internet infrastructure in emerging markets.

IXPs play an important role in Internet infrastructure that allows Internet service providers (ISPs) and other network operators to exchange traffic locally and more cost effectively, which can help lower end-user costs, speed-up transmissions, increase Internet performance, and decrease international Internet connectivity costs. The Internet Society and Internet technical experts have been working for several years to bring IXPs to emerging markets. These efforts have resulted in locally trained experts and facilitated the development of local and regional technical infrastructures. An additional benefit of IXP development is the expansion of community governance models as well as building local Internet expertise.

Google.org, a team within Google focused on social impact, develops and supports technology solutions that can address global challenges, such as expanding Internet access to more of the world's seven billion people.

"The Internet Society has proved to be one of the most effective institutions in the Internet community," said Vint Cerf, vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google. "I am confident that they will apply their grant wisely to extend their work to increase Internet access for everyone, including those in emerging markets."

Lynn St. Amour, President and CEO of the Internet Society, stated, "We are very excited to receive this grant from Google.org. With support to extend our IXP development and improvement projects, we can more quickly bring core Internet infrastructure to underserved countries and assist in building key human and governance capabilities. We will also be able to extend the Internet Society's mission to ensure the open development, evolution, and use of the Internet for the benefit of people everywhere. We look forward to working with Google.org, and we are committed to collaborating with Internet community partners around the world on this important project."

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: Access Providers

Since the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) discharged delegates from an atmosphere of restrained acidity last December, ITU habitués have wondered how that outcome will affect the rhythms of their regular work in Geneva. This is no less true for governments that approved of the WCIT treaty as it is for those which did not, though the immediate anxiety may be greatest for the latter — for those whom we can call, with sloppy shorthand, the G8. Such high stakes present the best reason to take time in deciding on the right next step.

Of Fashion and Sense

Even if the fashion is to disparage the ITU just now, bits of it function well enough. Those members of the G8 that are home to manufacturers of communications equipment and operators of broadband networks know this. They are, with periodic setbacks, ploddingly rewarded for their ITU work: they get (regionally) harmonised frequencies, telecommunications standards and, for operators of space networks, orbital positions that enable long-term operations. Since the WCIT, however, it is easy to believe that governments which are not part of the G8, having started to enjoy the alliterative sounds of their swadeshi rhetoric (classics never go out of style), will offer up less harmony, narrower spectrum uses, and a whole lot fewer parking places for the space assets of the G8's strategic communities.

A Body in Rest Tends to Stay...

2013-14: In the near-term the traditional ITU dynamics are unlikely to change much, for reasons both behavioural and economic.

Frequency and standards discussions remain largely technical. Participants in ITU radio work and standards matters are regulators and bureaucrats, not politicians. There are a few chances to grandstand, but the subject matter makes acerbity hard to sustain: the main argumentation and dialogue is underpinned by colourless, grinding engineering. "Economic colonialism" doesn't rhyme well with "Megahertz".

Nor do most developing countries contribute much to this part of the ITU process: they lack the market size to want to set their own standards, they lack indigenous businesses that demand one, and they lack manpower and budget to attend and push an agenda. Instead, these governments are inclined to arrive at the negotiations with broad instructions to listen to the arguments, and to decide positions according to what promises the best future and least reform. Who develops the compelling technical arguments to which these governments respond? Manufacturers and network operators, sometimes working in tandem with a predictable host of governments (try to spot a distinction between the positions of Nokia and Finland in some of these forums).

Finally, governments of even the least developed economies are clear on the importance of affordable network infrastructure, terrestrial or space-based; ditto on the efficiency of global standards. And a lot of switching equipment, handsets, networks, and satellite connections are still made or designed in the G8 (until China supplies all of these, universally… but this is yet a few years off). So no matter how tempting it may be to carry the WCIT tussle over into the regular ITU bodies, and to block access to the frequencies and orbital positions companies seek, it is the countries with the least developed infrastructures that would suffer most if the G8 were not allowed to continue to do well out of the ITU. More to the point: can you inveigh too long against the same entities that help build, connect or service your national broadband infrastructure without looking a little disingenuous?

Admit That the Waters Around You Have Grown

Inertia and the pace of economic development will not long stand between change at the ITU or anywhere else. But just now, after WCIT, they provide an eddy that allows us to avoid panicked policy decisions. We are on notice that conserving the benefits of the ITU's technical work will, over the longer term, require the G8's many stakeholders to develop their own individual international engagements. These will involve some considered outreach to developing-country governments to blunt the inclination to scold rather than collaborate, the restraint to leave much of the evangelising on matters of principle to the diplomatic corps, and a willingness to reward all organisations that serve them well with in-kind support, policy attention, and more than a bit of coin.

Written by Gregory Francis, Managing Director at Access Partnership

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: Internet Governance

I'm on the record multiple times over the last few months for my opinions on "closed generics". I first posted about it back in June of last year: Big Brands Trying To Corner Generic Namespaces?

Since then I've sent several letters to ICANN (supported by many others) and have been quoted and referenced in several articles on the subject including Politico.com: ICANN's debating what's in a domain name

Others have spoken out on this topic also:

• Kathy Kleiman to ICANN
• Microsoft to ICANN
• Dave Winer

If you're not a domain "geek" then the danger of this issue might not be that easy to understand, so here are five reasons why "closed generics" are a really bad idea.

1. The Internet thrives with freedom of choice and openness
2. Dozens of applications to ICANN for new top level domains (gTLDs) seek to completely segregate and close-off common words for use by one company, rather than for the entire industry, group or class.
3. Generic Words Belong to All People; .CLOUD, .BEAUTY, .BOOK, .BLOG, .SEARCH and .SECURITY should be open to all with appropriate interests and industries
4. Closed Generic TLDs lead to unfair closures and improper restrictions. Companies will be barred from using the generic string of their industry to promote their own businesses on an equal and fair footing online; Entrepreneurs and inventors will be inhibited from bringing new products to market for fear that a large segment of the Internet marketplace will be closed to them; and Consumers, thinking they are accessing an entire industry, will not know the name space is controlled by one entity and competitors are locked out
5. ICANN rules allowed a limited exception for Brands to create a closed space (.BMW), but not for entire classes of goods, services and people to close off (.STORE, .CARS and .BABY)

Just over a week ago Conn and I recorded an interview with domain blogger and journalist Kevin Murphy in which we talked about several things including new TLDs. Kevin gave a fantastic example of a wonderful new TLD — .blog.

As Kevin said in the interview, if you go to a .blog domain name you'd expect to find a "blog". It'll do exactly what you'd expect.

But, as we know Google has applied for .blog and has stated that they'll restrict the domain to Blogger. Here's what they've told ICANN they intend to do:

The purpose of the proposed gTLD, .blog, is to provide a dedicated Internet space where Google can continue to innovate on its Blogger offerings. The mission of the proposed gTLD is to provide a dedicated domain space in which users can publish blogs. All registered domains in the .blog gTLD will automatically be delegated to Google DNS servers, which will in turn provide authoritative DNS responses pointing to the Google Blogger service. The mission of the proposed gTLD is to simplify the Blogger user experience. Users will be able to publish content on a unique .blog domain (e.g., myname.blog) which will serve as a short and memorable URL for a particular Blogger account. This mission will enhance consumer choice by providing new availability in the second-level domain space, creating new layers of organization on the Internet, improving the Google user experience, and signaling the kind of content available in the domain.

So you won't be able to use a .blog with WordPress, MovableType, TypePad, Joomla or any of the other blogging platforms or solutions out there. So much for competition and choice!

But it's actually worse than that!

Charleston Road Registry intends to apply for an exemption to ICANN's Registry Operator Code of Conduct and operate the proposed gTLD with Google as the sole registrar and registrant.

Translation: Google will be the holder / registrant / owner of ALL domains under .blog, so even if you are happy with being restricted to the Google blogging platform you'll never have any real control over yourname.blog

If you are a blogger, shouldn't you be able to choose which blogging software or platform you use? Shouldn't you be able to register a domain for yourself?

What about some of the other closed generic applications?

Look at a sample of them below:

.app (Amazon)
.app (Google)
.baby (Johnson & Johnson)
.antivirus (Symantec)
.book (Amazon)
.cloud (Symantec)
.hair (L'Oreal)
.video (Amazon)

What gives Symantec exclusive rights to every single domain under .cloud?

What about Amazon and .video?

If you agree that this kind of use of new TLDs is a fundamentally bad idea then please let ICANN know via their comment period here.

Related articles:
Closed gTLD debate threatens Google and Amazon Domain Incite
Questions on the Debate on 'Closed Generic' gTLD Applications CircleID

Written by Michele Neylon, MD of Blacknight Solutions

Follow CircleID on Twitter

More under: Domain Names, ICANN, Internet Governance, Policy & Regulation, Top-Level Domains