<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Milton<div><br></div><div>Isn't "no discernible benefits" a rather sweeping and strong ex ante assertion? Does the fact that you personally don't like the GAC's involvement in any of this necessarily mean that there can be no instances of useful public interest concerns being raised via this vehicle, even if it wasn't specified in the hallowed AGB?</div><div><br></div><div>I would agree with Evan that it'd be useful to engage and seek improvements. NC is after all supposed to be into global public interest concerns, at least that's what it says on our publicity material. Whether there's sufficient bandwidth at this particular juncture is a different matter...</div><div><br></div><div>Bill</div><div><br><div><div>On Aug 31, 2013, at 10:04 PM, Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="font-family: Palatino; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">I’ve had trouble following all the thrashing about on PICs and the PICDRP, but on the whole I view it as a disaster that should be resisted as much as possible. My understanding is that PICs were not part of the AGB, they were imposed on the process by GAC. As such, they introduce yet another more or less arbitrary form of interference in the freedom of registry operators to do things and have no discernable benefits for registrants.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); "> </span></a></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><b><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; ">From:</span></b><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-<a href="mailto:DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Evan Leibovitch<br><b>Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 AM<br><b>To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br><b>Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>[NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: [ALAC] New draft on Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Greetings from ALAC-land.<o:p></o:p></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">I am interested to know if anyone in NCSG is following -- and may have an interest in -- the proposed ICANN mechanisms for evaluating and enforcing Public Interest Commitments in new gTLD applications.<o:p></o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">I attach a draft of the latest "Public Interest Commitment Dispute Resolution Procedure", that was recently brought to our attention by ALAC member Rinalia Abdul Rahim. In her message to ALAC, regarding this draft (which has been presented to registries), she notes that in the procedures:<o:p></o:p></div><div><ul type="disc" style="margin-bottom: 0in; "><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Third parties cannot report/file PIC violation (the entity that files/reports has to demonstrate that it has been harmed).<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">No mention of fees for filing violation. Also, unclear who will bear the cost burden when panel is constituted to render judgement. ICANN tends to pass on this type of cost burden to the parties.<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Burden is on the violation filer/"reporter" to make a thorough and complete filing of objection and to make itself available for a "conference" or consultation. If filings are incomplete or the reporter doesn't show for the conference, case is dropped.<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Reporter can be designated as "Repeat Offender" based on track record, which can be counted against it in future case filings and consideration.<o:p></o:p></li></ul><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">These issues suggest a process that is (IMO) biased against those who report violations.<o:p></o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">If there are to be such obstacles to challenging breaches of the PICs, why have them in the first place?<o:p></o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">What are the points of view on this in NCSG? Is this issue on the radar here? Might there be interest in joint NCSG/ALAC pushback on this anti-whistleblower bias?<o:p></o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Cheers,<o:p></o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">--<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Evan Leibovitch<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Toronto Canada<o:p></o:p></div><blockquote style="margin-left: 30pt; margin-right: 0in; "><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Em: evan at telly dot org<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Sk: evanleibovitch<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; ">Tw: el56</div></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>