[NCSG-PC] Public comment on spec

[Caleb Ogundele]

I'm fine with this comment.

*Caleb Ogundele*
Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026, 10:36 AM Tapani Tarvainen via NCSG-PC <
ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is> wrote:

> Looks good to me. I would like to suggest one minor change:
>
> in III 2., after "particularly those from the Global South"
>
> add " and speakers of small minority languages".
>
> Not critical, I would support it either way, but I'm hoping
> to get some Sámi people interested...
>
> Tapani
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 10:23:11AM -0500, farzaneh badii via NCSG-PC (
> ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is) wrote:
> >
> > Here is what our penholders have drafted:
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hxr_WoU0tidEu6dgdZ0mbcgwEVrsIcYHud9ZgfeXui0/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> >
> > Submitting it in a few hours.
> >
> >
> > Farzaneh
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 12:32 AM farzaneh badii <
> farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > We are late but we have drafted a one paragraph which we need to submit
> > > tomorrow in response to a call for public comment on spec 14.
> > > Yao has come up with an excellent system for NPOC which we can
> use.(have
> > > to check with him)
> > >  If you have other comments let me know.
> > >
> > > Specification 14 - Variant TLDs: Registrant Choice and Bundling
> Concerns
> > > NCSG is concerned that Section 2.15’s mandatory bundling of variant
> > > second-level domain names across TLD Sets inadequately considers
> registrant
> > > autonomy in multilingual contexts. While we understand the technical
> > > rationale for preventing confusion through unified allocation,
> requiring
> > > that “all second-level domain names, and any allocatable variants
> thereof,
> > > under the TLD Set is either allocated to the same registrant, or else
> > > withheld for possible allocation only to that registrant” creates a
> forced
> > > bundling mechanism that could increase costs and reduce flexibility for
> > > community organizations, civil society groups, and individual
> registrants
> > > operating across multiple scripts and languages. This is particularly
> > > problematic for communities where different organizations may
> legitimately
> > > represent the same concept or entity in different linguistic or
> cultural
> > > contexts. We recommend that ICANN develop clearer guidance on how
> > > registrants can decline variant bundles they do not need, ensure
> pricing
> > > structures do not penalize those required to hold variants they have
> no use
> > > for, and consider whether exceptions should be available for
> demonstrated
> > > community need where different parties have legitimate claims to
> variants
> > > in different scripts. The specification should explicitly preserve
> > > registrant choice rather than defaulting to mandatory acquisition
> models
> > > that primarily serve registry operator administrative
> > > convenience.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
> > >
> > >
> > > Farzaneh
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > NCSG-PC mailing list
> > NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> > https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20260127/bc15e011/attachment.htm>