<div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">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.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""><br></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">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 </span></p><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div><br></div><b>Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche</b><div><b> Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo</b></div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/3/5 McTim <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com" target="_blank">dogwallah@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Riaz,<br>
<br>
I can't parse any of your replies below, so I won't try to reply.<br>
<br>
Instead, as an exercise in capacity building, I will try to answer the<br>
original question (who owns the new gTLDs?) posed in this thread.<br>
<br>
The answer is that no one "owns" them. Domain names are delegated to<br>
registrants. It's more like a "lease" than "ownership". This is the<br>
case for multiple and single-roots. It also describes the situation<br>
for numbering resources more adequately than ownership.<br>
<div class="im HOEnZb"><br>
--<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
McTim<br>
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A<br>
route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Riaz K Tayob <<a href="mailto:riaz.tayob@gmail.com">riaz.tayob@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 2013/03/05 03:34 PM, McTim wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Riaz K Tayob <<a href="mailto:riaz.tayob@gmail.com">riaz.tayob@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> CA<br>
>>><br>
>>> I rather like it because it sounds like McTim is for specialisation in<br>
>>> comparative advantage, as they use at the WTO - ACTA, NAFTA, etc -<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Sounds like you are trying to put words into my mouth ...again!<br>
><br>
><br>
> "sounds like" if I were to locate your comment theoretically.<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> so it has<br>
>>><br>
>>> the virtue of consistency. And also locates me, as a wannabe heterodox<br>
>>> economist, in relation to what I discern as the market orientated McTim<br>
>><br>
>> In truth, I think that CIRs (names and numbers) should be available<br>
>> based on a cost recovery basis. However, that horse left the barn<br>
>> some decades ago in the names world, and the numbering horse seems to<br>
>> be charging for the door like its tail is on fire at the moment.<br>
><br>
><br>
> See is an ought, then perhaps an oligopolistic or monopolistic analysis then<br>
> would be more appropriate? 'Defending' the status quo or a market<br>
> orientation would require some caveats because of the objective control CIR<br>
> institutions exert directly or indirectly.<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>> (I<br>
>>><br>
>>> have to be careful because it seems like economic categorisations on this<br>
>>> list are rather casually and oft inappropriately used<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> like you have done once again in this mail ;-/<br>
><br>
><br>
> See first response.<br>
><br>
> I'll bide my time, I think I am onto something. But always happy to be<br>
> surprised. After all, follow the market is quite a revolutionary idea, and I<br>
> did not take you for one of those. The market can take you up the dotcom<br>
> curve, to a resounding splat... and of course, if we include network effects<br>
> and first mover advantages, then even the concept of a market based approach<br>
> presumes a position on these uncompetitive advantages... after all if prices<br>
> are not RIGHT, how can the market function on such signals...<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> , a matter I would like<br>
>>><br>
>>> to avoid, since it is better to keep shut and be thought a fool than to<br>
>>> open<br>
>>> one's mouth and leave no doubt).<br>
>>><br>
>>> The internet may be universal, but its institutional infrastructure, at<br>
>>> CIR,<br>
>>> is pretty much US based.<br>
>><br>
>> Except for the 4 RIRs NOT based in the USA (and the 10's of thousands<br>
>> of LIRs that are their members), the 192 ccTLDs NOT based in the USA,<br>
>> the AfTLD, LACTLD, etc, etc.<br>
><br>
><br>
> And the applicable law, and powers of recall to delegations?<br>
><br>
><br>
>> ICANN is setting up real HQ hubs in Turkey and Singapore, there is a<br>
>> real push to internationalize the organisation. Why would we demonise<br>
>> and oppose this? We should celebrate it, as it is exactly what we have<br>
>> been asking for!<br>
><br>
><br>
> is and ought, sets and venn diagrams. I am not part of your 'we'.<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> <nonsense snipped><br>
><br>
><br>
> Some peoples garbage are others treasure. Nice to have the dialectic. My<br>
> nonsense asserts that market orientation underrates the inherently political<br>
> character of these arrangements that serve dominant interests. I can see why<br>
> we must differ.<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>>> Now this argument may seem like a stretch, but theoretical felicity<br>
>>> requires<br>
>>> *intrasystemically* that the 'market' be characterised by large numbers<br>
>>> of<br>
>>> producers who are price takers, a case that is not the case in many<br>
>>> levels<br>
>>> of the CIR - which suffers from state 'interference'. And this is<br>
>>> relevant<br>
>>> because of the way the pragmatic (or ad hoc) deviations from the<br>
>>> theoretical<br>
>>> values basis, for instance inclusion of public interest clauses, are<br>
>>> needed<br>
>>> as comparators of the accomodation made. This is McTs pragmatism and<br>
>>> realism. Which intimates he is more a neoliberal than a neoclassical;<br>
>>> avoiding of course the entire point between philosophy and ideology and<br>
>>> the<br>
>>> relative merits of both which leave un-practical or un-technical people<br>
>>> at a<br>
>>> disadvantage. Of course one need not point out that too technical or<br>
>>> natural<br>
>>> science a view tends toward denying the fact that there is no objective<br>
>>> Archimedean point in matters social.<br>
>>><br>
>>> In short, a market orientated approach is idealistic in its conception of<br>
>>> the CIR and Internet as a market<br>
>><br>
>> There are multiple markets that make up the Internet, even within the<br>
>> categories of CIRs. To deny this is to deny reality. I don't see<br>
>> your point here.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Control and power - see point above about political construction of markets.<br>
> Simple. The analogy you make here would be called in mainstream economic<br>
> terms 'shadow prices' (if one were to dispense with monopoly/oligopoly as<br>
> above). These markets are political constructions even if delegated with<br>
> some autonomy.<br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> (confusing what is with what ought), and<br>
>>><br>
>>> fails on its own terms. But as we see it has traction because these types<br>
>>> of<br>
>>> ideas are pragmatically mercantalist for those who currently hold the<br>
>>> advantages.<br>
>>><br>
>> How would you adjust the situation? Today there is a meeting in Addis<br>
>> of the African folks involved in ICANN/DNS industry trying to build<br>
>> more interest in the DNS ecosystem in Africa. I welcome this<br>
>> initiative. ICANN is spending many millions of USD on Outreach and<br>
>> Engagement. Would you prefer they don't?<br>
>><br>
> Ah the appearance of what is the alternative. Unlike Reagan and Thatcher who<br>
> implied there is no alternative TINA, there are hundreds of alternatives.<br>
> ICANN et al will do whatever they do, as they must. To wit, In 1985 in South<br>
> Africa the apartheid government gave representation to Indians and Coloured<br>
> in South Africa to boost their race credentials. Did not help in terms of<br>
> race legitimacy. Then we also have to deal with how the ICANN system looks<br>
> after its own... with its troops of single rooters etc ever ready to push a<br>
> line defending the status quo with some ad hoc changes. So technically it<br>
> may be good, I can concede that, no institution is completely one thing or<br>
> another.<br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
><br>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>