two letter domain names and GAC

[Seun Ojedeji]

Thanks Million, a few comments inline

On Jul 5, 2017 7:06 PM, "Mueller, Milton L" <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:



*From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Seun
Ojedeji
*Sent:* Saturday, July 1, 2017 3:07 AM
*To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
*Subject:* Re: two letter domain names and GAC



Interesting that this is generalised as "pronounce" but it seem to me that
they are specific on the respective 2 letter (and 3 letters) country codes,
and one may argue that there seem to be a logic to that regard.



Seun. Really. Has it occurred to you that some country codes are the same
as pronouns? Like [it] for example? Or the same as other simple words, like
[be]?

SO: Yes that's right but your use of the word "some" actually makes my
point. It's better we stick with the main issue and not generalise on all
pronouns because their request IMO seem specific enough.



We have been debating this issue for two decades now. We should know how to
handle it. Some names have legitimate concurrent uses. It’s time to resist
greedy claims based on discredited rationales. No party – be it
governments, trademark holders, intergovernmental organizations, or anyone
else – can claim ownership of generic terms, initials, and pronouns in the
ENTIRE domain name space simply because the letters happen to correspond to
an identifier they have used in another context.

SO: Well so much complications has been introduced in the domain world
already that makes minimal consideration for order an unreasonable thing. I
certainly don't see why a .ng.com should be allowed to exist when there is
a .com.ng. Some have said it's innovative, but I don't think that is
innovation, that is confusion staring at our face, that is unhealthy
competition between the CCs and the Gs and that IMO is "somewhat" act of
greed on the side of the Gs.



NCUC’s position on this is, and should be, clear to all: we oppose
unjustified land grabs in the domain name space, so that end users and
noncommercial users have a legitimate chance (not a guarantee) to use names
they want.

SO: You know we do a lot of things in the name of end-users. To claim that
end users are the main beneficiary here eludes me. However I will not make
attempt to change an NCUC position (since it seem it's a done deal?). One
question that always come to my mind is who is land grabbing here; the one
that cannot find any other pronoun/string to use but then goes for country
codes or the one that says don't use our country codes.



There is a clear way to resolve these concurrent use conflicts, and it is
through ex post (not ex ante) adjudication of whether the similarity is
exploited to confuse or defraud people. The idea that anyone who uses the
string [it] in the second or third level of a domain name space is
undermining the rights of Italy as a country is just so plainly silly to me
that I wonder whether anyone here actually wants to defend it. Any takers?

SO: I don't think we should wait for actual (ex post) before putting
preventives especially if forecast (ex ante) makes sense. It's like saying
we should be robbed first before thinking of security measures, am sure you
not agree with that line of thinking during the transition ;-). That said,
I think the confusion/competition may be somewhat reduced at third level
but certainly not for second level.

Regards
PS: sent from my handheld



Dr. Milton L. Mueller

Professor, School of Public Policy

Georgia Institute of Technology









Will be interesting to see how it goes.



Regards



On Jun 30, 2017 2:35 PM, "farzaneh badii" <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:

All,





I wrote about two-letter domain names around a year ago http://www.
internetgovernance.org/2016/08/26/another-government-land-
grab-in-the-name-space/



 It seems like some in GAC do not back off on this issue and now I found
out that there will be a task force on this issue  according to GAC
communique.



1. 2-Character Country Codes at the Second Level With respect to the
2-Character Country Codes at the Second Level GAC Copenhagen Communiqué
Advice (para VI.4), the GAC;
a) welcomes and appreciates the decision made by ICANN Board directing the
President and CEO of ICANN or his designee(s) to take necessary actions for
satisfactory resolution of the concerns raised in that Advice;

and b) welcomes the announcement made by the President and CEO of ICANN of
his intention to create a task force to resolve the concerns mentioned in
the above communiqué. In this regard the GAC proposes that the mandate and
working methods of the above mentioned Task Force be determined in
consultation with GAC leadership and GAC members, and other interested
parties.



We have to be on this task force. There is no legitimate reason for
governments to claim ownership over pronouns and other generic two letter
domain names. Do I need permission from Italy to register it.sucks? Also I
am uneasy that they created a task force which relates to generic names
(pronouns, remember) and GNSO is not even mentioned.







Best







Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170705/7379a708/attachment.htm>