[governance] who owns the new gTLDs?

Tue Mar 5 10:35:36 EST 2013

Lo revolucionario para el ICANN sería adoptar una Internacionalización de
un código Continental y dentro de ellos sub-códigos para los países de ese
Continente, para los futuros (gTLD) y demás aplicaciones.

Otro sería que ICANN se Internacionalicé, que sea un ente autónomo, tener
centros o sedes en todos los Continentes y todo el personal que lo
represente o trabajen deben rotar en todas las sedes o centros del ICANN

*Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche*
*                        Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo*

2013/3/5 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>

> Hi Riaz,
>
> I can't parse any of your replies below, so I won't try to reply.
>
> Instead, as an exercise in capacity building, I will try to answer the
> original question (who owns the new gTLDs?) posed in this thread.
>
> The answer is that no one "owns" them.  Domain names are delegated to
> registrants.  It's more like a "lease" than "ownership".   This is the
> case for multiple and single-roots.  It also describes the situation
> for numbering resources more adequately than ownership.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2013/03/05 03:34 PM, McTim wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> CA
> >>>
> >>> I rather like it because it sounds like McTim is for specialisation in
> >>> comparative advantage, as they use at the WTO - ACTA, NAFTA, etc -
> >>
> >>
> >> Sounds like you are trying to put words into my mouth ...again!
> >
> >
> > "sounds like" if I were to locate your comment theoretically.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> so it has
> >>>
> >>> the virtue of consistency. And also locates me, as a wannabe heterodox
> >>> economist, in relation to what I discern as the market orientated McTim
> >>
> >> In truth, I think that CIRs (names and numbers) should be available
> >> based on a cost recovery basis.  However, that horse left the barn
> >> some decades ago in the names world, and the numbering horse seems to
> >> be charging for the door like its tail is on fire at the moment.
> >
> >
> > See is an ought, then perhaps an oligopolistic or monopolistic analysis
> then
> > would be more appropriate? 'Defending' the status quo or a market
> > orientation would require some caveats because of the objective control
> CIR
> > institutions exert directly or indirectly.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> (I
> >>>
> >>> have to be careful because it seems like economic categorisations on
> this
> >>> list are rather casually and oft inappropriately used
> >>
> >>
> >> like you have done once again in this mail ;-/
> >
> >
> > See first response.
> >
> > I'll bide my time, I think I am onto something. But always happy to be
> > surprised. After all, follow the market is quite a revolutionary idea,
> and I
> > did not take you for one of those. The market can take you up the dotcom
> > curve, to a resounding splat... and of course, if we include network
> effects
> > and first mover advantages, then even the concept of a market based
> approach
> > presumes a position on these uncompetitive advantages... after all if
> prices
> > are not RIGHT, how can the market function on such signals...
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> , a matter I would like
> >>>
> >>> to avoid, since it is better to keep shut and be thought a fool than to
> >>> open
> >>> one's mouth and leave no doubt).
> >>>
> >>> The internet may be universal, but its institutional infrastructure, at
> >>> CIR,
> >>> is pretty much US based.
> >>
> >> Except for the 4 RIRs NOT based in the USA (and the 10's of thousands
> >> of LIRs that are their members), the 192 ccTLDs NOT based in the USA,
> >> the AfTLD, LACTLD, etc, etc.
> >
> >
> > And the applicable law, and powers of recall to delegations?
> >
> >
> >> ICANN is setting up real HQ hubs in Turkey and Singapore, there is a
> >> real push to internationalize the organisation.  Why would we demonise
> >> and oppose this? We should celebrate it, as it is exactly what we have
> >> been asking for!
> >
> >
> > is and ought, sets and venn diagrams. I am not part of your 'we'.
> >
> >>
> >> <nonsense snipped>
> >
> >
> > Some peoples garbage are others treasure. Nice to have the dialectic. My
> > nonsense asserts that market orientation underrates the inherently
> political
> > character of these arrangements that serve dominant interests. I can see
> why
> > we must differ.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> Now this argument may seem like a stretch, but theoretical felicity
> >>> requires
> >>> *intrasystemically* that the 'market' be characterised by large numbers
> >>> of
> >>> producers who are price takers, a case that is not the case in many
> >>> levels
> >>> of the CIR - which suffers from state 'interference'. And this is
> >>> relevant
> >>> because of the way the pragmatic (or ad hoc) deviations from the
> >>> theoretical
> >>> values basis, for instance inclusion of public interest clauses, are
> >>> needed
> >>> as comparators of the accomodation made. This is McTs pragmatism and
> >>> realism. Which intimates he is more a neoliberal than a neoclassical;
> >>> avoiding of course the entire point between philosophy and ideology and
> >>> the
> >>> relative merits of both which leave un-practical or un-technical people
> >>> at a
> >>> disadvantage. Of course one need not point out that too technical or
> >>> natural
> >>> science a view tends toward denying the fact that there is no objective
> >>> Archimedean point in matters social.
> >>>
> >>> In short, a market orientated approach is idealistic in its conception
> of
> >>> the CIR and Internet as a market
> >>
> >> There are multiple markets that make up the Internet, even within the
> >> categories of CIRs.  To deny this is to deny reality.  I don't see
> >> your point here.
> >
> >
> > Control and power - see point above about political construction of
> markets.
> > Simple. The analogy you make here would be called in mainstream economic
> > terms 'shadow prices' (if one were to dispense with monopoly/oligopoly as
> > above). These markets are political constructions even if delegated with
> > some autonomy.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>   (confusing what is with what ought), and
> >>>
> >>> fails on its own terms. But as we see it has traction because these
> types
> >>> of
> >>> ideas are pragmatically mercantalist for those who currently hold the
> >>> advantages.
> >>>
> >> How would you adjust the situation?  Today there is a meeting in Addis
> >> of the African folks involved in ICANN/DNS industry trying to build
> >> more interest in the DNS ecosystem in Africa.  I welcome this
> >> initiative.  ICANN is spending many millions of USD on Outreach and
> >> Engagement.  Would you prefer they don't?
> >>
> > Ah the appearance of what is the alternative. Unlike Reagan and Thatcher
> who
> > implied there is no alternative TINA, there are hundreds of alternatives.
> > ICANN et al will do whatever they do, as they must. To wit, In 1985 in
> South
> > Africa the apartheid government gave representation to Indians and
> Coloured
> > in South Africa to boost their race credentials. Did not help in terms of
> > race legitimacy. Then we also have to deal with how the ICANN system
> looks
> > after its own... with its troops of single rooters etc ever ready to
> push a
> > line defending the status quo with some ad hoc changes. So technically it
> > may be good, I can concede that, no institution is completely one thing
> or
> > another.
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130305/f0b66242/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t