Questions to and from Board in ICANN 61

[farzaneh badii]

Thank you all, the deadline is tomorrow. I will compile these and come up
with a set of questions which we can put forward by tomorrow. Will be
shared with the list.

Farzaneh

On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 4:00 PM, Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:

> Since I will not be at ICANN 61, here is my one comment on the "anti-spam"
> issue:
>
> About the CCT RT review team recommending that ICANN consider Registry
> Agreements (for subsequent new GTLDs or whatever) that include financial
> incentives for registries, especially open registries, to adopt proactive
> anti-abuse measures, I see this as a non-starter.
>
>  If “financial incentives” means ICANN funds, ICANN is likely facing
> declining revenues (and maybe increased [legal] costs), for many reasons.
> One might be able to squeeze more juice from a plum, but less so out of a
> prune.
>
> This is an area where Registrars and Registries must take the lead, maybe
> with a bit of “prodding” from places like the EU policy, fines, and more
> legal requirements, and maybe a little help from ICANN.
>
> ICANN has, of course, within its mandate an interest in less DNS abuse,
> but ICANN probably should play a role here more like the one the ILO plays
> for its (admittedly restricted) multistakeholder community. The ILO staff,
> or commissioned others, work to produce “best practice” ideas.
>
> The community takes the best practice ideas elsewhere to deliberate, shape
> and adopt. The ILO staff, and retained expertise, operate like a labor best
> practices policy development think tank. There might be a lesson from that
> approach for the ICANN community to be considered here.
>
> Sam L
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180211/d1db4439/attachment.htm>