[governance] Cities and Internet Governance

Mon Feb 23 20:18:58 EST 2009

Oh really Karl, have you read any of ICANN's Draft Applicant Guidebook? What's your problem?

I know the people from dotBERLIN have been talking to other "Berlins" in the world. So why can't the various Romes of the world discuss how to share a gTLD?

Olivier: so your only argument against a new city gTLD is that nobody might not want to use it. Well, that's a risk anyone in a commercial marketplace takes when they release a new product. Maybe you haven't realised, but in ccTLDs such as Germany with over 12 million domain names, it's pretty damn difficult to get a decent domain name for your business or personal use.

Given the costs involved, not every little town will ever be able to justify applying for their own gTLD. So in one sense, ICANN is right to charge a larger fee for applying as it keeps out the less serious contenders.

I'm not sure what slippery slope you're on Karl, but it's not one dealing with reality.

David

________________________________
From: Karl E. Peters <kpeters at tldainc.org>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 February, 2009 11:36:04 PM
Subject: RE: [governance] Cities and Internet Governance

    Even little things like what happens if Rome, Georgia gets .rome and someone in Italy cries foul? Are we going to have a TLD level UDRP and REALLY foul things up? It seems the only way to protect against that is to give cities a SLD under their respective ccTLDs and in some cases, a tertiary LD under their state or provincial SLD. Otherwise, just in the USA alone, how many Greenvilles will be contending for the ONE corresponding TLD and what rules would determine the right to it?
    This is, at least, a slippery slope!!!
-Karl E. Peters, President
Top Level Domain Association, Inc.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [governance] Cities and Internet Governance
From: "Thomas Lowenhaupt" <toml at communisphere.com>
Date: Mon, February 23, 2009 1:27 am
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>

With the ICANN having deemed cities eligible to develop TLDs, and with cities such as Barcelona, Berlin, New York, and Paris lining up for TLDs, it’s time to consider the place and impact city-TLDs will have on Internet governance.

My presumption in presenting the following scenario is that cities will choose to put their TLDs to use for their long term development: to benefit city organization and governance, communities, neighborhoods, small businesses, residents, and their global “findability,” all toward the creation of economically viable and livable cities; and not merely treat their TLDs as monetization opportunities. Further, that cities will see their TLDs as community / civic resources, as vital as air, water, roads, and education systems are to their future. And we see the formation of conservator or trustee systems to assure their wise management. 

That said, let me review our experience developing a governance structure for the .nyc TLD, albeit a work in progress, and then project where cities might fit within the broader governance of the Net.

Creating a governance structure for a city TLD is new territory and we’re still fashioning structures to facilitate the TLD’s efficacy. Since creating Connecting.nyc Inc. as a not-for-profit in 2006 we’ve seen governance as the critical factor in determining the TLD’s success: important both to the inclusion of a diversity of viewpoints in planning and directing the TLD’s operation, and to receiving the approval and cooperation of the city of New York whose support we deem essential.

To date we’ve recruited a great core for our board of directors, established a Resident Advisory Network, and are in discussions with city officials about adding several ex-officio seats. To gain a feel for the city's concerns about the TLD’s governance, read the transcript (http://www.openplans.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/council-hearing-transcript) of our October 17 hearing before the City Council, in particular our discussion with Council Member DeBlasio about his desire to place a “short leash” on our operation. 

On our governance page (http://www.openplans.org/projects/campaign-for.nyc/board-of-directors)we discuss our intention to create space on our board of directors for public participation, with our Resident Advisory Network a first step in that direction. It’s a different structure than the ICANN’s current stakeholder model, destined to be local and more hands on.

With city TLD governance structures of this sort in place, we see city-TLDs, each with a governance model reflective of the city it serves, providing a mechanism for broader public participation within ICANN’s structure. It’s my expectation that, with their growing share of the world’s population, now 50% heading toward 70% in 2030, the Internet’s future governance form will reflect the participation of city-TLDs. And as we create participatory and effective governance structures for city-TLDs, they will garner standing for a significant role in the Net’s governance. 

Where are we today? In June 2008 the developers of the Barcelona, Berlin, New York, and Paris TLDs met in Paris to discuss cooperation between city-TLDs and participation in Internet governance processes. Last week a coalition of cities presented ICANN with a Notice of Intent to create a constituency within the GNSO. This is an appropriate first step, and within this newly developing sphere one begins to see an emergence of an engaged user community that will strongly influence governance of the Internet.

There’s lots more work to be done here, and we would appreciate and benefit from the thoughts of those on this list.
________________________________
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

      Make Yahoo!7 your homepage and win a trip to the Quiksilver Pro. Find out more
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090223/e6498a98/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance