ICANN Public Forum Substantive Real-Time Comments

Gene Marsh (Diebold Incorporated)
Action on recommendations (Reports, 9:47:15 AM, #1066)

Will the board take any action on the DNSO recommendations?

Nobuo Sakiyama ( )
Moblization in Japan (Reports, 9:47:55 AM, #1067)

ICANN should investigate the details
of the mobilization on the At-Large election
in Asia/Pacific region,
because many employees (at least 10,000, I think)
of IT comanies in Japan were ordered by their employers
to vote to Mr. Katoh.
ICANN staffs only can send inquires to all
at-large members.
Please see also: http://www.CivilSocietyInternetForum.org/election-report.html

Thomas Roessler
At Large Study Staff Paper (Reports, 9:48:05 AM, #1068)

Suggestions on the Study Committee.

TWO members of the group should be board members, one of them an elected At Large director. Only one member (possibly an initial board member) would create perception of bias.

Possibly let the two board members co-chair the group.

Define - in advance! - clear procedures according to which the committee would acknowledge consensus.

Judith Oppenheimer (ICBTollFreeNews.com)
Andrew's report suggestion (Reports, 10:05:12 AM, #1069)

I thoroughly support the remarks of Karl Auerbach regarding the "clean sheet" study.

Gene Marsh (Diebold Incorporated)
Consultative period (Staff Report on New TLDs, 10:45:35 AM, #1070)

In light of the cancelling of the consultative period, has there been any serious consideration for allowing the applicants more than three minutes to respond to the ICANN Staff Report?

Rebeka Goldberg (Digital Consciousness)
(Staff Report on New TLDs, 11:06:30 AM, #1071)

Evaluation Team/Report
Is there is a conflict of interest for Arthur Andersen with Core/Afilias application evaluation?
Please clarify this point.
Thank you.

Marcia Arbott (The NMB Network)
(Staff Report on New TLDs, 11:07:27 AM, #1072)

To all present:
Please note that an analysis of applications (most especially in respect to the staff's comments about Image Online Design, Inc.'s application) violated the following ICANN Bylaw:

Amended Bylaws
July 16, 2000
(c) The Corporation shall not apply its standards, policies, procedures or practices inequitably or single out any particular party for disparate treatment unless justified by substantial and reasonable cause, such as the promotion of effective competition.

Please rectify this violation before proceeding further.

Thank you,
Marcia Lynn Arbott

Fabrizio Coppola (Scientia (ipotesi.net))
Solution for new TLDs (Staff Report on New TLDs, 11:35:58 AM, #1074)

Would you agree on the following solution?
It enhances competition and reduces conflicts:
- .web to IOD ;
- .info to Afilias ;
- .biz to JVTeam.
This would be fair for IOD,
that has mantained a .web registry for 4 years
and is supported by generic Internet users.

Fabrizio Coppola
Scientia (ipotesi.net)

Richard Sexton (ORSC)
kids and xxx (Staff Report on New TLDs, 11:42:01 AM, #1075)

Would it be possible to have a quick show of hands - how many people in the audience would want their kids explicitly identified as such by a .kids email address or website?

On the other hand, that the registrar community doesn't want .xxx is irrelevent; it's the marketplace that makes these calls, not a business lobby that may not want to "sully itself" with a pornographic tld. Given that half the net is porn, .xxx seems like the most successful candidate for a new tld no matter how distasteful this may seem to poeple in Marine Del Rey.

Richard Sexton (ORSC)
kids and xxx (Staff Report on New TLDs, 11:42:05 AM, #1076)

Would it be possible to have a quick show of hands - how many people in the audience would want their kids explicitly identified as such by a .kids email address or website?

On the other hand, that the registrar community doesn't want .xxx is irrelevent; it's the marketplace that makes these calls, not a business lobby that may not want to "sully itself" with a pornographic tld. Given that half the net is porn, .xxx seems like the most successful candidate for a new tld no matter how distasteful this may seem to poeple in Marina Del Rey.

Joe Howe ( .Kids Domains, Inc.)
Criteria (Staff Report on New TLDs, 12:00:55 PM, #1077)

It seems as though the staff report has included the registration policies in the technological review of the .Kids Domains, Inc. proposal.

Do you feel as though the .Kids Domains, Inc. proposal is technically sound? The only comments I have heard are regarding international laws and rules that don't apply to technical issues.

Joe Howe ( .Kids Domains, Inc.)
TLD Approval (Staff Report on New TLDs, 12:04:09 PM, #1078)

Does the board take into effect the ability for .Kids Domains, Inc. to successfully address the difficult international differences(That Staff Suggests) as discussed in our application?

Alex Floum, Esq. ( )
IOD (Staff Report on New TLDs, 12:11:53 PM, #1079)

I recommend granting the .web registrar to IODesign. ICANN should grant at least one TLD to the main pioneer of a major new tld. IOD has a pioneer's preference, and the overwhelming majority of comments on ICANN's public comment board have been in favor of IOD.

Rebeka Goldberg (Digital Consciousness)
(Staff Report on New TLDs, 12:21:58 PM, #1080)

Please freeze the new TLD evaluation process and
prepare an ICANN At Large Members vote on the
new TLD's.

Stuart Goold (CECUA)
Citizens and the GIS (Public Comment, 12:22:45 PM, #1081)

Does the world citizen have the right to his/her own domain in their own name and does an individual business have the right to use their own trading name and if so, how is this to be achieved on a global basis.

Len Lindon (Court of ICANN Governance)
Court hearing on ICANN non-compliance (Welcome, 1:20:49 PM, #1082)

Non-compliance hearing today.

Deliberate and knowing failure and refusal of ICANN to comply with the Order of the Court of ICANN Governance dated Friday 10 November 2000.

Failure to remove non-elected directors and to allow newly-elected directors to vote.

Breaches of California State law, USA national law and international human rights laws.


Decision on penalty under consideration (submissions still accepted).

This notice submitted to ICANN Public Forum at 1.10pm local time, Wed 15 Nov.

Steve McLain (Internet Events International)
Official Response from IEI (Staff Report on New TLDs, 1:30:49 PM, #1083)

ICANN evaluators emphasized the fact that IEI does not have prior experience as a registry/registrar. While this is correct, it is a tremendous advantage. We offer ICANN, and the Internet community as a whole, new blood and fresh ideas, which will ensure the continued vitality of the Internet. According to the application instructions, "ICANN seeks… TLDs that will provide… a diverse range of concepts for innovative uses of the DNS." By recommending only the large conglomerates, with no notable change to the status quo, ICANN is setting a precedent that will be the exact antithesis of what it requested. It is our anticipation that the Directors of ICANN’s Board will evaluate the merits of our proposal with a more objective approach than that evidenced by the staff evaluation. This is a very exciting time that has the potential to revolutionize an already revolutionary arena. We are sure ICANN would rather be remembered for creating history, rather than merely repeating it.

Margaret Rhodes (self-employed)
restricted commercial TLD (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:03:45 PM, #1084)

The proposals for restricted commercial TLDs seem to address directly the important need to give clarity and predictability to commercial users -- both consumers and businesses -- who want to know that the commercial space on the internet -- where they spend most of their time -- is a reliable, safe place to do business.

Alex Floum, Esq. ( )
IOD (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:07:07 PM, #1085)

Abril i Abril made a good point: "entities selected by this procedure will be empowered over time". In other words, if Iodesign is chosen, it will get all the infusion of capital and technical expertise it needs. It will be a self-fulfilling prophecy leading to a very popular, robust, and "thick" registrar.

Also, IOD would have to follow through on its promises of adequate technical prowess and capitalization. ICANN can thus grant conditional approval to IOD.

The internet community WOULD back this decision.

Thank you for your consideration of my comments,

D. Alexander Floum,
Intellectual Property Attorney

Len Lindon (Court of ICANN Governance)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:18:05 PM, #1086)

Notice of Court hearing now re ICANN breach

"... The provisional view of the Court is that ICANN has no authority or legitimacy outside the State of California in the USA. And that it is in breach of both international human rights law and the corporate laws presently applying in California..."

"... In a human rights sense, ICANN is itself a "cybersquatter" on a gobal public resource-- and on the precedent of the WIPO UDRP cases ought have its "domain" transferred to the worldwide community of internet users (and potential users: see Court of the Digital Divide)..."



Non-compliance with Court order

Breach proceedings v ICANN
(failure to allow newly-elected directors to vote,
failure to remove non-elected directors)

Live Hearing: 8.30am est (9.30pm UTC) Wednesday 15 November 2000 Continuation hearing from Tuesday 14 November

Alexander Svensson (icannchannel.de)
NCDNHC Comments (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:23:28 PM, #1087)

Just for info:
The NCDNHC comments are indeed available online at http://www.ncdnhc.org/docs/event/meeting-13112000.html

Alex Floum ( )
NCDNHC Resolutions (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:25:14 PM, #1089)

I vote in favor of both of NCDNHC's resolutions regarding new top-level domain applications.

D. Alexander FLoum
Intellectual Property Attorney

Diane Cabell (Berkman Center)
Abacus Testimony (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:37:40 PM, #1092)

Neither Harvard Law School nor the Berkman Center takes any position on any gTLD application. Abacus was specifically informed that the briefing papers presented at our Sunday conference were the volunteer work of individual students at HLS and did not represent any official or formal approval by any one other than the student author.

Andy Coombs (The Walt Disney Company)
Personal DNS (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:43:43 PM, #1093)

Proposals for new "personal" top-level domain name space do not satisfy the purposes implied by this designation. The Board should adopt the BC proposal to study ccTLD implementation of personal top-level domain name space. This will serve the additional purposes of encouraging maximum expansion of the personal domain name space and encourage constructive communication with the ccTLDs.

Friedrich Kisters (human bios gmbh)
Afilias (Public Comment on New TLDs, 2:55:01 PM, #1094)

May we ask to openly discuss the following issue:

AFILIAS is talking about their geografical diversity.

In reality we are talking about ONE single company and therefore, geographically seen, about an extremely large monopole, which with the help of its international presence will be able to PREVENT any kind of diversity.

This of cours means the exactly the opposite of what Afilias states.

May we ask what ICANNs position regarding this issue is?

Thank you.

Friedrich Kisters
Human Bios GmbH

Marcia Arbott (The NMB Network)
IOD's presentation (Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:02:56 PM, #1096)

To the ICANN Board of Directors and Staff,
I would like it duly noted that I support Image Online Design, Inc.'s and believe they should be awarded the .web registry for the reasons I've outlined in the public forum II. (There is a restriction on number of characters in this submission and I am not allowed for write my reasons in their entirety.)
Marcia Lynn Arbott

Friedrich Kisters (human bios gmbh)
Afilias (Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:28:44 PM, #1097)

To NeuStar and Afilias:

Isn't .web the best know ending for a new gtlds, because IOD has already been introducing it into the internet community for over 4 years now?

Don't you feel it to be unappropriate to request becoming the registry for .web now, exclusively for the sake of economic advantages and instead of IOD, who did the work you didn't do?

Friedrich Kisters
Human Bios GmbH

friedrich kisters (human bios gmbh)
Core (Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:30:42 PM, #1098)


Could you kindly explain the general public, how your "premium services" work. Thank you.

Friedrich Kisters
Human Bios GmbH

Rebeka Goldberg (Digital Consciousness)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:32:45 PM, #1099)

Is the application from Neustar for .web
still valid, after the divorce of Melbourne IT
from the Joint Venture/JV Team (the
original bidder for this application)?

Judith Oppenheimer (ICBTollFreeNews.com)
colliding TLD's (Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:41:30 PM, #1100)

What is ICANN's position regarding probable challenge from existing TLD's if you choose to adopt colliders for the ICANN root?

Richard Sexton (ORSC)
Single letter domains (Public Comment on New TLDs, 3:46:28 PM, #1101)

The Sarnoff proposal was originally .i but were told you can't have a single letter tld and the name is now .iii

The histrical reson single letter tlds weew not allowed was the same reason single letter tlds were not allowed and that is Jon Postel felt one day the DNS would expand to a million names and we might need to split up names so that say vrx.net would be vrx.ne.t to distributre the load.

In a 30+ million SLD world, it's *readily* apparant that there IS NO TECHNICAL REASN to continue to reserve single letter domains.

What is ICANN doing to reverse this accident of history?

Thomas Occhipinti (Spectral Web, Inc.)
Image Online Design, Inc. (Public Comment, 4:09:51 PM, #1103)

Spectral Web, Inc. advocates for diversity and competition in the domain industry and supports the application of Image Online Design.

Image Online Design has already proven its technological viability, has a strong registrant base, and is the .web pioneer.

Spectral Web, Inc. asks ICANN to approve the application of Image Online Design at this time.


Thomas Occhipinti
President, Spectral Web, Inc.

Richard Sexton (ORSC)
Single letter domains (Public Comment on New TLDs, 5:29:38 PM, #1105)

The Sarnoff proposal was originally .i but were told you can't have a single letter tld and the name is now .iii

The histrical reson single letter tlds weew not allowed was the same reason single letter tlds were not allowed and that is Jon Postel felt one day the DNS would expand to a million names and we might need to split up names so that say vrx.net would be vrx.ne.t to distributre the load.

In a 30+ million SLD world, it's *readily* apparant that there IS NO TECHNICAL REASN to continue to reserve single letter domains.

What is ICANN doing to reverse this accident of history?

YangWoo Ko (PeaceNet)
DNSO Review (Public Comment, 5:37:27 PM, #1106)

= Names Council is not an executive.
Under the ICANN Bylaws, the Names Council is responsible for the management of the consensus building process of the DNSO. But, the Names Council often has been acting as a representative legislature, empowered to make rules, rather than as the facilitator.
When the Names Council can not find community consensus from the proposed recommendation, the Names Council is advised to return it to the body from which it is originted for further work or forward it to the board with statement that it lacks community consensus. (ICANN Bylaws Article VI-B SEction 2. (d))

YangWoo Ko (PeaceNet)
DNSO Review - Revitalize GA (Public Comment, 5:39:33 PM, #1107)

= General Assembly should be revitalized.
Currently, General Assembly is left out of the loop in consensus building process. Whether intended or not, the Names Council has been discussing and resolving issues inside the Names Council or its own committee rather than designating those works to Working Groups or other bodies of General Assembly. Therefore, the starting point to revitalize General Assembly is that the Names Council plays its management role as is defined under ICANN Bylaw.

YangWoo Ko (PeaceNet)
Form DNSO Review WG (Public Comment, 5:40:59 PM, #1108)

= Establishing Working Group for DNSO Review
Discussions so far regarding DNSO Review revealed that effectiveness and efficiency of DNSO should be and can be improved. So, DNSO should establish a Working Group which will do more detailed review on DNSO and suggest DNSO improvement plan.

YangWoo Ko (PeaceNet)
DNSO Review - Constituency (Public Comment, 5:41:49 PM, #1109)

= Reorganizing constituency structure
There is a strong consensus on the fact that constituencies are still not operating effectively and should be improved. Some interests are over represented while others are not or under represented. This unfair represenation problem should be solved by reorganizing constituency structure.
DNSO can be categorized by two constraints - Supply/Demand & Commercial/Noncommercial. Using this categorization, DNSO will have the following four constituencies:
- ccTLD ( Supply, Noncommercial )
- Internet Business ( Supply, Commercial )
- Commercial Internet Users ( Demand, Commercial )
- Noncommercial Internet Users ( Demand, Noncommercial )

YangWoo Ko (PeaceNet)
Multiligual Domain Names (Public Comment, 5:45:30 PM, #1110)

Regarding multiligual domain name registration, in August this year, ICANN alreday commented that multilingual domain name system must be accomplished through open standards. NSI Registry started multiligual domain name registration service a few days ago for Chinese, Korean, and Japanese characters. Now is the time for ICANN as a technology coordination body to start a monitoring on this new service closely as mentioned in the comment.
So, I kindly request ICANN Board to make a committee, or a WG, or whatever, which will examine the current status and effects of multilingual domain name deployment. In this examination, possible effects to Internet end users should be regarded as a top priority.

Joe Chizmarik (The Knowledge Sculptors/Cyber On! America!)
How to Evaluate New TLDs (Public Comment on New TLDs, 5:54:20 PM, #1111)

Choose those that will most increase community, cooperation, and competition in an area of endeavor; choose a few now for proof of concept then evaluate and re-visit at a later date.

Marcia Arbott (The NMB Network)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 6:33:56 PM, #1112)

Dear ICANN Board, Staff, and meeting attendees both physical and remote:

Several years ago, lots of people identified a need for additional TLDs, but very few did anything about it. Image Online Design is a company that didn't just sit back and talk about the inevitable evolution of the DNS, they did something about it, by initializing and then expanding the .web registry for over four years. They are the pioneers of the .web registry, deserve applause for their ground-breaking steps to introduce choice to all internet users, and deserve to have their .web database added to the A-root servers.
They have publicly stated that they are more than willing to work with ICANN to bring their vision and years of hard work to fruition.
Please, Board Members, do what is fair and just so that people can continue to stand behind your organization. Allow Image Online Design's database entry to the A-root servers.

Sincerely hoping justice will guide you,
Marcia Lynn Arbott

Oscar Robles (NIC-Mexico)
Contracts ICANN/cctlds (Public Comment, 6:40:04 PM, #1113)

Forget about GAC principles, if my government wants the cctld they will have it, with our without GAC principles, with or without your blessing.
It's been six months since you instructed the staff to work closely with us, and nothing happened since then.
You should care about operational issues and let politics to governments.
If you were committed to the stability of the DNS system we invite you to come and sit in the same table to negotiate contracts between cctlds and ICANN.

Steve McLain (Internet Events International)
.event TLD (Public Comment on New TLDs, 6:47:10 PM, #1115)

We would like to assure our global colleagues that the .event TLD is intended to operate in multiple languages at launch time. These include, but will not be limited to, English, Portugese, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Mandarin Chinese, and Japanese. Additional languages to be added later will include, but are not limited to, Russian, Hindi, Arabic, Hebrew, and any other languages dictated by market needs.

Steve McLain,
Executive Vice President,
Internet Events International, Inc.

Joe Howe ( .Kids Domains, Inc.)
Create Space (Public Comment on New TLDs, 6:51:47 PM, #1116)

At this point ICANN has an opportunity to create a "Greenspace" for children.

.Kids Domains, Inc. has put forward a plan to enforce voluntary restrictions agreed to among registrants.

The Staff report at this time credits .Kids Domains, Inc. as having the best possible opportunity to enforce such restrictions.
With all .kids applicants agreeing that now is the time to create this TLD I urge the ICANN board to agree with earlier comments and grant .Kids Domains, Inc. the sponsored and restricted TLD.

With technical soundness approved through the staff report I ask the Board Members to continue to examine this decision.

Ray Fassett (Rock-N-Roll.Net)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 6:54:28 PM, #1117)

Does the ICANN board feel there is any conflict of interest involving any of the applications other than such conflicts that have already been publicly addressed?


Ray Fassett

joanna lane ( )
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 6:57:47 PM, #1118)

Can the board allay fears felt by the At Large membership about possible conflicts of interests, in particular with regard various roles held by Mr. Ken Stubbs

Gregory Krajewski (At Large Member)
Image Online Design (Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:01:41 PM, #1119)

I would just like to voice my support for IOD's dot web application. They have a well rounded proposal to provide trademark protection as well as protect consumer interests. Lastly, please do not discount the amount of support this company has received, and contrary to belief the ICANN public comment board does represent a broad representation of internet users from around the world.

Thank you.

Lynn Farny ( )
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:05:02 PM, #1120)

The Internet is moving beyond its frontier phase where "anything goes" into a more mature environment. ICANN's Board should select the new generic TLDs carefully and only chose a minimum number of new TLDs and only those that are actually needed for the existing environment to continue an orderly evolution. For this round, I would only open up one or two new domains, let those settle in and then perhaps chose others later. This is a way to guard against cybersquatting and mass registrations of multiple domains while enabling the Net to expand in an orderly manner.

Blaise Avé-Lallemant ( GA)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:08:51 PM, #1121)

In light of the impact of introducing any new gTLDs, I feel it is important to be most judicious and patient in deciding to choose new extensions.

While a lot of time has been put in to applications and reviews, there should more time given for comments and study of these domains.

Perhaps the recent introduction of the slew of ccTLDs can be studied in more depth, before making the decision to engrain new domains to the global internet.

Richard Forman (register.com)
New TLDs (Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:09:38 PM, #1122)

ICANN was authorized to increase competition in the domain name system. It has done so in the face of substantial adversity and many parties have tried to derail the process. Throughout these challenges, there has been one consistent theme -- progress.

This process began many years ago and there has been a substantial amount of discussion, working groups and consideration preceeding the moment that we are at today.

I believe that a successful challenge to ICANN and delay to the introduction of new TLDs at this point in time might pose a risk to the entire ICANN initiative. The risk is that control and management would revert to the Department of Commerce -- an event that few people involved with the Internet desire.

I encourage you to accept as many applications as you believe adequately and appropriately address the guidelines set forth in Yokohama, Japan. Whatever you do, do not delay.

Thank you,

Richard Forman

Friedrich Kisters (human bios gmbh)
domain names (Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:15:05 PM, #1123)

Could you kindly explain the general public, why domain names are NOT treated like addresses.

If they were, everyone would realize that they simply cannot violate trademarks.

Friedrich Kisters
Human Bios GmbH

Ray Fassett (Rock-N-Roll.Net)
(Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:15:13 PM, #1124)

I do not believe a sunrise period is necessary for any TLD especially in light of the fact that the UDRP has alrerady been set up to address this specific issue.

Judith Oppenheimer (ICBTollFreeNews.com)
888 has no relation with Sunrise (Public Comment on New TLDs, 7:24:11 PM, #1125)

Michael Palage stated that toll free 888 is a precedent for trademark protection in the DNS.

On the contrary, the FCC ruled in In the Matter of ) CC Docket No. 95-155 Toll Free Service Access Codes ) FOURTH REPORT AND ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: March 27, 1998 Released: March 31, 1998 that "Although we recognize commenters' concerns regarding trademark infringement and unfair competition, we find that those issues properly should be addressed by the courts under the trademark protection and unfair competition laws, rather than by the Commission."

(52 messages total)

Other ICANN-Related Content from The Berkman Center for Internet & Society
Translate with Altavista Babelfish: Deutsch, Espanol, Francais, Italiano, Portugues

All times are LA (GMT -8)

This file is automatically generated.