RE: First draft of an ORG policy - please comment
I am attaching a few comments to the proposed draft.
De: Milton Mueller [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Enviado el: Viernes, 03 de Agosto de 2001 23:38
Para: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
CC: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Asunto: First draft of an ORG policy - please comment
ORG Task Force members:
During the past week I conferred with representatives
of the Noncommercial community and with members
of the ISP, Business-Commercial, and Intellectual
Property constituencies in Washington DC. Of course,
that is just a start.
In the statement below, I have tried to define
a set of policy prescriptions that takes account
of the various concerns I heard and the areas of
agreement I discerned.
Please let me know what you think of it. Perhaps
we can have something ready by the Names Council
teleconference on August 16.
NAMES COUNCIL .ORG DIVESTITURE TASK FORCE
Statement of Policy (v 1.0, August 3, 2001)
1. Administration of ORG should be delegated to a new,
non-profit entity with broad, international support
and participation from non-commercial organizations
inside and outside of the ICANN process. The new
registry should develop policies and practices
supportive of noncommercial constituencies. It should
be authorized to contract with commercial service
providers to perform technical and service functions.
2. The new ORG registry must function efficiently and
reliably. The entity chosen by ICANN must show its
commitment to a high quality of service for all .ORG
users worldwide, including a commitment to making
registration, assistance and other services available
in different time zones and different languages.
3. The transition should make it clear at the outset
that current legal registrants will not have their
registrations cancelled nor will they be denied the
opportunity to renew their names.
4. While "restricted" TLDs may play a role in the
future development of the name space, .ORG's history
of accessiility and openness, combined with the
difficulties of establishing an easily enforcable,
globally acceptable definition of "non commercial,"
make prior restrictions on registration a bad idea
for .ORG in the future. .ORG should continue as an
5. .ORG's original status as a place for registrants
who "don't fit anywhere else" must be retained.
While .ORG must remain a TLD for traditional
noncommercial organizations and non-profits, it must
also be recognized as a TLD that supports individuals,
households, unincorporated organizations, business
partnerships with non-profits, and other social
6. While .ORG should remain an unrestricted TLD, the
new delegee should identify ways to differentiate and
strengthen the special identity of ORG, such as
marketing and promotion strategies targeting
noncommercial uses and users, and by not encouraging
defensive or duplicative registrations.
7. .ORG's administration must be consistent with
policies defined through ICANN processes, such as
policies regarding registrar accreditation, shared
registry access, dispute resolution, and access to
registration contact data. Consistency does not mean
total uniformity, however; the new registry's mandate
to support non-commercial interests should permit it
latitude to develop special policies and practices
suited to those interests so long as they do not
undermine critical policy objectives.
8. The DNSO Task Force developing ORG policy should
work directly with the ICANN staff in drafting a
Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit applications for
the delegation, and play a direct and co-equal role
with ICANN staff in the selection of the new registry
#133987 v1 - domain name .org. TF.doc