<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
The following was written (by me) for the global health community's
Health Information for All 2015 (HIFA2015) discussion group.
HIFA2015 had been a venue for vocal criticism of ICANN's handling of
the .health gTLD. This drops down a notch to the .city TLD
initiative and discusses a problem tossed up by the creation of
.nyc. While the problem is with second level domain names, the
parties to the problem have views on what should constitute a
responsible role for ICANN here. The problem is complicated,and
won't go away. It is another area where ICANN can be engaged and
show leadership, or watch passively as Internet DNS naming policy is
developed elsewhere. - Sam L. <br>
<br>
<b>Posting for </b><b><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:HIFA2015@dgroups.org">HIFA2015@dgroups.org</a></b><br>
<br>
<font color="#330099">The global health community has been vocal
but, to date, largely unsuccessful in its struggle over the
.health generic Top Level Domain name, now in the hands of a
private-for-profit company. There is a second problem on the
horizon, and it will strike closer to home for many organizations
in the global health community. It has to do with geographic based
domain names and second level domain names. For example, if
.nairobi is a city TLD, health.narobi could be a second level
domain name, owned by the city or a private company. This can
create multiple issues for community groups. Here is already
unfortunate current situation for community mental health groups
in New York. The application period (so called Landrush) for
second level .nyc domain names ended last Friday October 3rd. On
Saturday one community health organization applicant received a
notice from the registrar handling its application informing it
that more than one applicant had requested the MentalHealth.nyc
domain name, and that the domain name would be sold at auction
with 60% of revenue going to the private company managing .nyc for
New York City, and 40% to the city.<br>
<br>
The problem here is that unlike the ICANN auctions there is no
transparency with regard to who the various applicants are. As a
second level domain issue ICANN has washed it hands of such
issues. In the direct ICANN auctions the various applicants are
known and can negotiate to avoid an auction or collaborate on
bidding. None of that is possible here. The community health group
in question is advocating for transparency as a basis for a
collaborative dialogue around MentalHealth.nyc. If another party
has a superior plan this community group would be prepared to
withdraw its application. With a blind auction nobody has an idea
of who the other bidders are. This organization is a half century
old not-for-profit serving a small section of the city. Perhaps
the others applicants do similar work. This community group is
asking for some assurance of transparency for applicants at this
second level, wishfully here, and certainly in any new gTLD
efforts. It suggests that this should be part of an ICANN contract
language driven Informed Consent process. This also raises an
issue of what should be the role of local governments in setting
the rules of the game for handling second level geographic TLD
issues.<br>
<br>
The further worry is that there is the possibility that the
MentalHealth.nyc name could be sought by a comedy club, or maybe
to market a magic health produce. While recognizing both of these
might qualify as beneficial to mental health, the applicant argues
that from a city perspective the more traditional health use of
the name would be more appropriate. For this reason, they would
like to see the ICANN Informed Consent provisions provide for
greater transparency and multistakeholder engagement in selecting
public interest name set-asides at the the .city and related
geoTLD levels. If as a last resort an auction is necessary, they
feel that the proceeds should be retained within the community and
not siphoned off by the gTLD gate keepers. This is how the ICANN
private auctions work where the proceeds of the auction are shared
by the losing bidders. <br>
<br>
What can global community health community people do here? First,
they can press both ICANN and their respective national government
representatives to ICANN's Government Advisory Council (GAC) for
more appropriate second level provisions in the Informed Consent
language of ICANN contracts. Second, they can watch efforts at
local .city TLD and other geographic gTLDs in their home
territories and engage their governments and the applicants early
in the process. This will not be easy but it is just another
“rules of the game” challenge flowing from the pandora's box of
the Internet ecosystem.<br>
<br>
Sam Lanfranco, Chair<br>
ICANN/NPOC Policy Committee </font><br>
</body>
</html>