RE: [nc-org] Version 3.0 of policy statement

["Guillermo Carey C." <gcarey@carey.cl>]

Thank you Milton for your efforts in preparing version 3.

I have the following comments whic I have located after the pertinent
paragraph:

The ICANN Board is instructed to award the ORG domain 
only to applicants that conform to the following criteria:

1. ORG Should be a Sponsored, Unrestricted Domain

The new ORG top-level domain should be a sponsored 
but unrestricted domain.

1a. Sponsored.
The sponsoring organization should develop a 
definition of the relevant community for which ORG 
domain names are intended. The new administrator would 
define the specific types of registrants who 
constitute the target community for ORG and propose 
marketing and branding practices oriented toward that 
community. The marketing practices should not 
encourage defensive or duplicative registrations.

Regarding the definition of the relevant community, 
the DNSO offers this guidance: the definition should 
include not only traditional noncommercial and non-
profit organizations, but individuals and groups 
seeking an outlet for noncommercial expression and information exchange,
unincorporated cultural, 
educational and political organizations, and business 
partnerships with non-profits for social initiatives.

GC : Agree


1b. Unrestricted
With a defined community and appropriate marketing
plan in place, the sponsoring organization and 
operating registry would rely entirely on end-user 
choice to determine who registers in ORG.

GC: As discussed in Montevideo, I would agree leaving to a certain extent
that the final responsability should rely on the end user. However, we
encourage some safeguards that should be adopted at a registry-registrar
level imposing on those entities selling this name space, certain
restrictions in accordance with the objective and focuss of the new .org
space. For example certain restrictions should limit the marketing policies
of the registrars (i.e. if you cant register xxxx.com you could try
xxxx.org). The whole purpose of leaving this space unrestricted is not to
affect those companies and individuals who are already using the .org.
However, this should not be interpreted as a name space that its completely
unrestricted. 

Specifically, the new entity:
* Must not evict existing registrants who don't
  conform to its target community. The transition must 
  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.

GC: See my comments above. There should be some restrictions at the form
these are being marketed to end users.


* Must not attempt to impose prior restrictions 
  on people or organizations attempting to make new 
  registrations

GC: See comments above. The whole idea is to have a names space for non-comm
and no profit organizations and individuals, therefore I would asume that
the sponsoring organization will be the most interested in taking all the
steps to ensure this. The marketing efforts should be cleary directed for
this effect and the possibility to direct the marketing efforts by resellers
of this name space should be possible.

* Must not adopt a new dispute initiation procedure
  to take away registrations ex post (other than the 
  UDRP, which would apply as per #4 below).

GC: Agree, if the above comments are considered

<explanatory commentary>

2. Characteristics of the Entity

Administration of ORG should be delegated to a
non-profit entity with international support and 
participation from .ORG registrants and non-commercial 
organizations inside and outside of the ICANN process. 
It should be authorized to contract with commercial 
service providers to perform technical and service 
functions. Either new or existing organizations should 
be eligible. 

Applicants should propose policies and practices 
supportive of noncommercial participants in the ICANN process. 

The DNSO encourages applicants to propose governance 
structures that provide ORG registrants with the 
opportunity to directly participate in the selection 
of officers and/or policy-making council members.


3. Operational Criteria for Selection
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.

GC: Agree
 
4. ICANN Policies
.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. The new entity must not 
alter the technical protocols it uses in ways that 
would impair the ability of accredited registrars to 
sell names to end users.

GC: As long as consistent does not mean amending the current level of
protection and safeguards regarding dispute resolution policies and access
to registration contact data, we agree. I asume that the last part of this
paragraph refers only to technical aspects. As indicated above, there should
be some restrictions in the form how these names be marketed by registrars.


5. Follow Up
The DNSO Task Force developing ORG policy 
should review the request for proposals prepared by the
ICANN staff prior to its public dissemination to 
ensure that it reflects the DNSO policy. 

GC: Agree
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu]
Enviado el: Sábado, 22 de Septiembre de 2001 18:49
Para: nc-org@dnso.org
Asunto: [nc-org] Version 3.0 of policy statement


NAMES COUNCIL .ORG DIVESTITURE TASK FORCE

Statement of Policy (v 3.0, September 23, 2001)


The ICANN Board is instructed to award the ORG domain 
only to applicants that conform to the following criteria:

1. ORG Should be a Sponsored, Unrestricted Domain

The new ORG top-level domain should be a sponsored 
but unrestricted domain.

1a. Sponsored.
The sponsoring organization should develop a 
definition of the relevant community for which ORG 
domain names are intended. The new administrator would 
define the specific types of registrants who 
constitute the target community for ORG and propose 
marketing and branding practices oriented toward that 
community. The marketing practices should not 
encourage defensive or duplicative registrations.

Regarding the definition of the relevant community, 
the DNSO offers this guidance: the definition should 
include not only traditional noncommercial and non-
profit organizations, but individuals and groups 
seeking an outlet for noncommercial expression and information exchange,
unincorporated cultural, 
educational and political organizations, and business 
partnerships with non-profits for social initiatives.

1b. Unrestricted
With a defined community and appropriate marketing
plan in place, the sponsoring organization and 
operating registry would rely entirely on end-user 
choice to determine who registers in ORG.

Specifically, the new entity:
* Must not evict existing registrants who don't
  conform to its target community. The transition must 
  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.
* Must not attempt to impose prior restrictions 
  on people or organizations attempting to make new 
  registrations
* Must not adopt a new dispute initiation procedure
  to take away registrations ex post (other than the 
  UDRP, which would apply as per #4 below).

<explanatory commentary>

2. Characteristics of the Entity

Administration of ORG should be delegated to a
non-profit entity with international support and 
participation from .ORG registrants and non-commercial 
organizations inside and outside of the ICANN process. 
It should be authorized to contract with commercial 
service providers to perform technical and service 
functions. Either new or existing organizations should 
be eligible. 

Applicants should propose policies and practices 
supportive of noncommercial participants in the ICANN process. 

The DNSO encourages applicants to propose governance 
structures that provide ORG registrants with the 
opportunity to directly participate in the selection 
of officers and/or policy-making council members.

3. Operational Criteria for Selection
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.
 
4. ICANN Policies
.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. The new entity must not 
alter the technical protocols it uses in ways that 
would impair the ability of accredited registrars to 
sell names to end users.

5. Follow Up
The DNSO Task Force developing ORG policy 
should review the request for proposals prepared by the
ICANN staff prior to its public dissemination to 
ensure that it reflects the DNSO policy.