Dear all,
As you are aware ICANN is meant to introduce new gTLDs, however,
during the just ended
meeting in Cartegna, various stakeholders continued to raise a
number of
controversial aspects of the new gTLDs programme, which include
but not limited to geographic names, root
zone, scaling, economic analysis, malicious conduct, etc. The
ICANN board resolved
to provide more time to stakeholders to discuss and work through
the
remaining issues. Africa ICANN representatives remain very
concerned about the high costs for
applications/process, which is likely to exclude
those without the level of financial resources required, e.g
cultural and other
non-commercial groups, among others from benefiting from the
opportunities the new gTLDs
will offer.
Please see Draft Applicant Guide (DAG)
book:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/draft-rfp-clean-12nov10-en.pdf and send in
comments.
See Africa ICANN statement below.
best
Alice
-----------------------------------------------------------
Following ICANN Board’s resolution 20 in Nairobi meeting whereby
“The Board requests stakeholders to work through their SOs and ACs,
and form a Working Group to develop a sustainable approach to
providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying and
operating new gTLDs ."
• We, members of the African Community, consisting of AFRALO and
AfrICANN, at the ICANN meeting in Brussels, jointly welcomed the
Board resolution 20 and expressed our gratitude to the Board members
for their consideration of the community concerns about the cost of
applying for new gTLDs that might hinder applicants, especially
those from developing countries.
• We adopted a statement in which we expressed the expectations
of the African Community from the so-called resolution 20, which
statement was sent to the ICANN Board and the JAS Working Group
which was formed for the purpose.
In its retreat in Trondheim (Norway), the ICANN Board decided late
September 2010 that Support to applicants will generally include
outreach and education to encourage participation across all
regions, but any direct financial support for applicant fees must
come from sources outside of ICANN. It also decided that the fee
levels currently in the Applicant Guidebook will be maintained for
all applicants.
• While we welcome the decision of providing outreach and
education support to applicants who require assistance, we, members
of the African Community, in Cartagena express our deep concern
regarding the non- consideration of the fee reduction that we, and
the JAS Working Group, proposed.
• We consider that without application cost reduction, the
developing countries, and especially those of the African region, as
well as the
disadvantaged communities willing to apply for a cultural,
linguistic or ethnic gTLD will be excluded from this new gTLD
program, that the resolution 20 wanted it to be inclusive.
• We strongly believe that assistance should be provided to the
needy applicants at the upcoming first round of application, and not
at some possible future round, because:
o Without assistance for applicants needing support, all of the most
obvious names, including IDNs, will be taken by rich investors,
leaving little opportunity to local community institutions and
developing country entrepreneurs
o Even if it is intended to open a second round, its date is at best
uncertain regarding the experience of the 2001’s round.
• We strongly support the milestone report of the JAS Working
Group, and look forward to the consideration of its recommendations
by the ICANN Board.
• We are supportive of all on-going work as per the
recommendations of the JAS WG Charter.
--