<p dir="ltr">As per previous notes to Maria and Marilia, I'm interested in collaborating in elaborating on *underrepresentation of developing countries* under different perspectives: political, distributional (or international trade) and purely commercial (economies of scale).</p>
<p dir="ltr">Carlos Raúl</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sep 30, 2015 7:03 AM, "Norbert Klein" <<a href="mailto:nhklein@gmx.net">nhklein@gmx.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    +1 supporting Rafik's suggestions/initiatives to elaborate.<font color="#888888"><br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Norbert Klein<br>
    Kep/Cambodia<br>
    <br>
    =</font><div class="elided-text"><br>
    <br>
    <div>On 09/30/2015 06:56 PM, Rafik Dammak
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">Hi everyone,</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">trying to summarize the topics
          suggested until now, I tried to capture comments as much as
          possible but maybe I missed things.</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">- <b>Public Interest: </b></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><i><b>"</b>Can we ask the board how it
            is coming with its research in the "global public interest".
            In the annual mtg last where we asked the board about its
            understanding of the global public interest, how it
            determines, on what basis, etc.  At that time, the board
            said it was just getting started on compiling some research
            that it would share and had hired Nora.  So it would be
            great if we could have an update or further conversation on
            this concept, how it is determined and applies, etc.<b>"</b></i></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><b><br>
          </b></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">there was several comments with that
          regard indicating that a research is ongoing and mostly done
          within ICANN, not looking outside . a consultation process is
          planned<b> </b>and starting in Q4 to get community input and
          continue till June 2016.</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">-<b> Developing countries:</b></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">starting with the Nielsen report (<a href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-09-25-en" target="_blank"><a href="https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-09-25-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-09-25-en</a></a>)</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">"Nielsen's report confirms that Latin
          America, Asia and Africa will likely be the great drivers of
          new gTLD acceptance and use, while most registries are still
          based in developed regions. There is a net transference of
          resources taking place from the developing to the developed
          world in the DNS industry. The problems that developing
          regions face have been extensively explained.  What is the
          perception of the board? In the opinion of board members,
          which concrete measures could be put in place? Why not even
          suggestions from the JAS report have been implemented yet?
          Would the board commit to a clear plan to address the current
          imbalances before a new round of applications is launched?"</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">there was also comment that we can also
          ask the Global Domain Division (GDD) during a GNSO session .
          Others mentioned: knowledge imbalance, capacity building and
          remediation mechanisms of imbalance in next rounds</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">about this issue, I would remind people
          that we got lately 3 reports in relation to that, it will be
          useful to go through them :</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">- regarding next rounds <a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en" target="_blank"><a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-subsequent-prelim-2015-08-31-en</a></a></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">- review on previous new gTLD round: <a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-draft-review-2015-09-23-en" target="_blank"><a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-draft-review-2015-09-23-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/public-comments/new-gtld-draft-review-2015-09-23-en</a></a></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">- assessment of new gTLD program with
          regard to competition: <a href="https://www.icann.org/public-comments/competitive-effects-assessment-2015-09-28-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/public-comments/competitive-effects-assessment-2015-09-28-en</a></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">- <b>Human Rights</b></div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <p>"With the CCWP on HR we'll be publishing a new
            report on ICANN and</p>
          <p>human rights (comments still very welcome until
            Wednesday 30 23:59</p>
          <p>here: <a href="http://is.gd/gItc5W" target="_blank"><span>http://is.gd/gItc5W</span></a>
            ). So perhaps we can ask ICANN about how</p>
          <p>they envisage living up to article 4 of the
            articles of incorporation</p>
          <p>and whether there are concrete plans to do or
            develop:</p>
          <p>1. A human rights policy</p>
          <p>2. A human rights impact assessment</p>
          <p>3. A full corporate social responsibility strategy</p>
          <p>in order to live up to the existing commitments.
            And whether they are</p>
          <p>thinking of using the UN Guiding Principles on
            Business and Human</p>
          <p>Rights for this. And of course: what is the
            timeline for this."</p>
          <p><br>
          </p>
          <p>I would like to add comment about developing
            countries and new gTLD program issue, there was a lot of
            work done by NCSG on that matter within GNSO and we
            succeeded in 2010 to get a joint working on new gTLD
            applicant support, with the active participation of several
            NCSG members.<br>
          </p>
           A report  was delivered with several recommendations , some
          of them were  approved in 2011 by the board :<br>
          <br>
          - timeline for the working group is here <a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2011/jas" target="_blank"><a href="http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2011/jas" target="_blank">http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/inactive/2011/jas</a></a><br>
          <br>
          -  the report there <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/jas-final-report-2011-10-13-en" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/jas-final-report-2011-10-13-en</a><br>
          <br>
          - the  implementation is here <a href="http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support" target="_blank">http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/candidate-support</a>)</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">the result of the implementation was
          satisfactory due partly that the program was implemented quite
          late when the new gTLD program itself was starting and there
          was no significant outreach to get more applicants from
          developing regions.</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">The same issue concerns having more
          registrars from developing countries and there was last year
           a consultation launched by ICANN staff <a href="https://community.icann.org/display/prjctgdduro/Project+Roadmap%3A+Supporting+the+Domain+Name+Industry+in+Underserved+Regions" target="_blank"><a href="https://community.icann.org/display/prjctgdduro/Project+Roadmap%3A+Supporting+the+Domain+Name+Industry+in+Underserved+Regions" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/display/prjctgdduro/Project+Roadmap%3A+Supporting+the+Domain+Name+Industry+in+Underserved+Regions</a></a>
          . </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">I would conclude about this  that we
          should leverage those existing initiatives to go further and
          be effective.</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">going back to the topics discussion, it
          still going on and we should tune and refine the topics and
          their descriptions. other suggestions are welcome too.</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">Best Regards,</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">Rafik Dammak</div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra">NCSG Chair</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div></div>

</blockquote></div>