[governance] [govenance] The domain name racket goes on

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Sep 20 09:07:30 EDT 2014

On Friday 19 September 2014 12:51 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
> On September 18, 2014 at 19:33 parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) wrote:
>   > Yes, after such intense consultations, they decide that the global
>   > public is ok with giving .health to a US organisation that promotes the
>   > interests of big pharma against cheap generic drugs, which is a matter
>   > of life and death to so many poor people, is likely to auction .book to
>   > Amazon as a closed generic, so that Amazon holds the rights to what can
>   > be called as a digital book, and so many other monstrosities...
> There seems to be this idea floating around that new TLDs have some
> higher purpose than just a place to register SLDs.

You probably dont know that the.health in its current arrangement will 
be 'policed' 
as to who would be given sub domain names under it and who will be 
refused.... My problem is that this will be done by a US group, close to 
big pharma, following US norms, standards and law, while English is 
spoken widely outside the US and this should have been done by a body 
that is subject to international norms/ standards/ law. In any case, US 
norms/ standards about intellectual property - the biggest costs in 
drugs - is most extreme and most contested, a US based organisation, 
close to US big pharma should certainly not be doing the 'policing'.
> The idea has come up from time to time in a highly inconsistent manner
> which feeds the confusion. So it's understandable. Much like people
> imagine there's someone in charge of internet content in general.
> Similar for .BOOK.
> With some notable exceptions here and there (e.g., GAC non-binding
> input) ICANN's process for new TLDs has been registry/registrar driven

Exactly the problem... These things should be driven by global public 
interest, but just by the interests of the concerned industry , over 
whom ICANN should be acting as a regulator. It is such a complete 
governance/ regulatory model screw up which is the real problem with 
ICANN. It is so structural that it needs basic changes, which is why I 
have never bothered to engage with all thsoe superficial engagement 
processes that ICANN keeps devising and running...

> and only rarely based on some strict notion of what should be done
> with the TLD beyond perhaps keep to the implied theme at least until
> registrations slow down.

Of course the notion that market takes care of all, every aspect of 
public interest as well, and only if market slows down it needs to be 
somehow pushed! Now I cant begin arguing with you, or that matter with 
McTim, on such basic ideological issues. It only hurts that such 
sentiments have taken over key global 'civil society' spaces to in fact 
become the dominant sentiments.


> Where there is some implied theme. One can look through the nTLD
> applications for hints.
> My favorite example: .CAMERA would seem to imply photography
> equipment. Yet it also means "room" in Spanish. So would selling SLDs
> to both the photography industry and hotels in Spanish speaking
> countries violate an assumption as implied above?
> My point being: What is any of this grousing based on? Beyond some
> imagining of how one might otherwise base their own nTLD program if
> they were in charge? Fantasy football.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140920/9cfd1ff8/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:

For all other list information and functions, see:
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

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

More information about the Governance mailing list