[governance] Re: [bestbits] Comments asking ICANN to deny application for .pharmacy registration

[parminder]

On Thursday 14 March 2013 07:45 PM, Rashmi Rangnath wrote:
> All:
>
> I thought many of you may be interested in this application that 
> Public Citizen filed opposing the National Association of Boards of 
> Pharmacy's (NABP) application for the .pharmacy TLD. Public Citizen is 
> concerned that the registration would allow the NABP to exclude 
> licensed pharmacies located in Canada from acquiring domain names 
> under .pharmacy. This would prevent access to affordable medicines for 
> many in the US.
>
> A link to Public Citizen's comments is here: 
> https://gtldcomment.icann.org/comments-feedback/applicationcomment/commentdetails/12145-- 
>



I completely agree, Rashmi.

However, you may want to go deeper into the roots of the issue. We 
should inquire from the civil society constituency engaged with the 
ICANN why did they not only allow but in fact supported giving all kind 
of generic names off as TLDs, (including closed generics) including 
those with such deep public interest implications as .pharmacy ....

In fact, it is the government advisory committee (GAC) that recently 
gave some very important 'advices' 
<https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/27132037/Beijing%20Communique%20april2013_Final.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1365666376000&api=v2>to 
protect public interest.

It advised that "strings that are linked to regulated or professional 
sectors should operate in a way that is consistent with applicable laws" 
and that the need to "establish a working relationship with the relevant 
regulatory,  or industry self-­-regulatory, bodies,  including 
developing a strategy to mitigate as much as possible    the  risks of 
fraudulent, and other illegal,  activities. "

This should very much apply to .pharmacy..... and I think the relevant 
global regulatory body for this purpose should be the WHO...

Public Citizen's referred comments also say that the TLD applicant plans 
to "maintain exclusionary plans for the domain"

The GAC advice says that "the registration restrictions should be 
appropriate for the types of risks associated with the TLD. The registry 
operator should administer access in these kinds of registries in a 
transparent way that does not give an undue preference to any registrars 
or registrants, including itself, and shall not subject registrars or 
registrants to an undue disadvantage. "

It  isalsocategorical that exclusive registry access may be given only 
if serves a clear 'public interest goal'.  (This covers, and hopefully 
puts the brakes on, closed generic TLD proposals like .book. .cloud, 
.music and .news).

It is highly problematic that the so called multi stakeholder model 
completely failed to serve the public interest in this case, even with 
numerous committees etc having going into the issue. And this includes 
the civil society associated with ICANN.... Finally, governments had to 
step in to protect the public interest. What has happened deserves a 
very deep inquiry and reflections, especially by progressive civil 
society groups . What is touted as a multistakeholder model at the ICANN 
is highly ideology infested. It is its complete belief in free markets 
as being able to protect most if not all kinds of public interests, that 
has resulted in it becoming blind to the various very problematic 
aspects of the new TLD program that now the governments had to step in 
to point out...

I think that the civil society individuals and groups that work closely 
with the ICANN, including on its various committees should also be 
answerable for this.... In some way, they are there to keep vigil on 
behalf of all civil society... Why did they not intervene in these deep 
transgressions into the public interest.

parminder

>
> Best,
>
> Rashmi
>
> Rashmi Rangnath
> Director, Global Knowledge Initiative and Staff Attorney
> Public Knowledge
> 1818 N Street NW
> Suite 410
> Washington, D.C. 20036
> 202 861 0020
> rrangnath at publicknowledge.org <mailto:rrangnath at publicknowledge.org>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130512/9aa32eeb/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