ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[nc-org]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[nc-org] Revised Statement of Policy


Fellow TF members:
Here is a revision of the principles based on 
your comments. Please note that I fully recognize
that Points 4 and 5 remain disputed by the IP
constituency, and by some members of the B&C
constituency. However, points 1-3 and 6-8 seem to be
basically accepted; correct me if that perception is wrong.

My idea is that we put these pirinciples
out for public comment immediately after the 
Montevideo meeting. After reviewing that comment
we should be prepared to make the changes and
compromises that can lead to consensus.

The public comment material will separate the disputed 
points from the undisputed ones. I will develop a set of 
questions designed to elicit community input that will provide 
guidance. I will have that text prepared in time for circulation 
among us and the NC in a few days. I encourage your suggestions.

===================

NAMES COUNCIL .ORG DIVESTITURE TASK FORCE

Statement of Policy (v 2.0, August 29, 2001)

1. Administration of ORG should be delegated to a new, 
non-profit entity with 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 and
registrants. 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 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 legacy 
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 
unrestricted TLD.

5. .ORG's original status as a place for miscellaneous 
registrants 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 
individual organizers, ideas, households, unincorporated 
organizations, business partnerships with non-profits, and 
other social initiatives.

6. 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 ICANN's policy objectives.

8. The Chair of 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 should participate in ICANN Board 
discussions surrounding the selection of the new registry 
operator.





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>