US Laws Remain Set To Govern The Coming Multilingual Internet thru ICANN's New gTLDs As ICANN Publishes Its Last Applicant Guidebook For Its Board Consideration.

Ankabooot Breaking News:

US Laws Remain Set To Govern The Coming Multilingual Internet thru ICANN's New gTLDs As ICANN Publishes Its Last Applicant Guidebook For Its Board Consideration.

ICANN published its 7th and supposed final New gTLD Applicant Guidebook in preparation for its board consideration on June 20th during its Singapore meeting.

To many nations and citizens around the world, especially the Non-English speaking communities, this will be seen as a strategically alarming direction for the global Internet. US laws remain set to govern ICANN's New gTLDs and the coming multilingual Internet in languages like Arabic, Chinese, Urdu, Cyrillic and many others which these New gTLDs will bring with them.

The clause on US laws appears on page 27 of the last Guidebook under the heading "Legal Compliance". It remained unchanged, un-discussed, and un-addressed by ICANN since Guidebook version 5 (DAG 5) came out last year despite many official open letters and interventions to ICANN.

Under this rule any applicant or entity whether Chinese, Russian or Arab, and regardless of their nationality, will be screened against U.S. laws and its economic and trade sanction program administered by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These U.S. Sanctions are imposed on certain countries, entities and individuals that appear on its OFAC's list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (the SDN List).

People, entities and countries the U.S. deems undesirable, or who don’t meet U.S. foreign policy agenda can be listed. Applicants for any New gTLD in any language that are named on such list will be refused by ICANN per this "legal compliance" clause that invokes U.S laws.

On this latest news Multilingual Internet Group, Ankabooot and MINC Chairman Khaled Fattal said: "There is a great realistic risk now that many governments and local language communities would boycott the New gTLD program. Some governments may actively start to consider deploying their own alternative Internets globally with serious economic and political consequences. The Internet we all use today, which is U.S. controlled and ICANN managed on their behalf, will no longer remain the only Internet root. We warned ICANN and the U.S. about this many times publicly and privately."

It is worth noting that ICANN had initially stipulated in Version 4 of its Guidebook (DAG4) under the same legal compliance that "Terrorism checks" will be conducted on all applicants while it provided no definitions whatsoever. This was strongly objected for by Chairman Khaled Fattal to ICANN Executives and its board that subsequently led to the deletion of the "terrorism check" from Guidebook 4 by a board resolution. ICANN subsequently replaced "Terrorism Checks" with US laws, OFAC and SDN in versions 5, 6 and now 7, its last.

ICANN’s new publication was accompanied by Explanatory Memoranda related to implementation and communication plans as well as analysis of the public comment received on the previous Guidebook version. Yet, little or no mention of the public concern ICANN received on the matter of US laws has been accounted for.

ICANN did note the diplomatic cooperation and compromise on many issues between its Board and its Government Advisory Committee (GAC) on the Applicant Guidebook 7.

Read the full article with linkks on Ankabooot News

Ankabooot.com Breaking News: ICANN's Newly Approved TLD for Dot xxx for Porn Announces its Pricing. Up to $650 for a .xxx domain - or to keep your name off it.

Ankabooot.com Breaking News:  ICANN's Newly Approved  TLD for Dot xxx for Porn Announces its Pricing. Up to $650 for a .xxx domain - or to keep your name off it.

By Kevin Murphy - The Register.co.uk


Pornographers and brand owners can expect to pay between $75 and $650 to register .xxx domain names, newly published registrar pricing schemes have revealed.

Trademark owners concerned about having their brands associated with online pornography may be hit especially hard by the forthcoming domain launch, according to reports in the trademark press.

ICM Registry, the Florida company granted the right to run the .xxx top-level domain by ICANN in March, today published details of its launch plan, which includes three mechanisms for registering domains in advance of the full go-live date, expected in December.

Trademark holders will get a 30-day window, starting in early September, in which they can apply to have their brands permanently "blocked" in .xxx.

Disney, for example, will be able to pay a one-time fee in order to have disney.xxx resolve to a standard place-holder page managed by the registry.

The idea is to give family-friendly non-porn brands the opportunity to distance themselves from online porn, without having to also run the risk of cybersquatting.

About 60 registrars have been provisionally approved to sell .xxx domain names, and a few of them have already revealed their pricing. For the "block" service, trademark holders can expect to pay between $249 and $648, depending on registrar and volume.

A report in World Trademark Review (registration required) this morning suggests that some brand owners may shell out over $100,000 in what it calls a ".xxx tax", if they choose to defensively enforce their entire portfolio of hundreds of valuable trademarks.

They are under no obligation to do so, of course. ICM has some of the highest prices and strongest intellectual property rights protection mechanisms of any domain extension to date, which may help to discourage mass cybersquatting.

"There will be a range of sanctions for registrants who violate the policies relating to intellectual property infringement, culminating in expulsion and loss of the registrant's domain name(s)," ICM president Stuart Lawley said.

ICM has previously said it plans to enforce lifetime bans on repeat cybersquatters. Cyber-baddies could also lose their entire .xxx portfolio if they repeatedly lose cybersquatting complaints.

The company has also said it plans to give trademark holders a way to shut down infringing .xxx sites in just 48 hours, modelled on Digital Millennium Copyright Act take-down notices. Full details of this process, and of the X-strikes-and-you're-out process, have not yet been finalised, however.

Porn sites can expect to pay about $300 if they want to claim their .xxx domains before the official launch. They do not have to own a trademark, however – simply owning a string in an existing extension such as .com or .co.uk will be sufficient to register during ICM's "sunrise" period.

In the event that a porn site and a non-porn site both apply for the same domain name, the porn site will be given priority, although they will be given a warning that a trademark owner is also interested in the domain, and may find themselves on the receiving end of a complaint.

When .xxx names become generally available, registrants will likely have to pay between $75 and $130 for their domains. This compares to a .com price that is regularly around the $10 mark, which has been a sore point for many in the adult entertainment business, who see .xxx as an unwanted cash grab.

ICANN’s Board decisions in Nairobi will determine its credibility and respect for years to come.

ay is the morning of the most revered Thursday in the ICANN meetings calendar - The public forum. It is tradition personified. It is the day when the show and the showcasing really begin. It is the stage and the choreography of the open microphone that can help influence ICANN decisions one way or another and make the supposed bottom up model appear at its best. Often, it serves to inform the board of issues they may have overlooked, other times it is a pre-planned, pre-arranged and choreographed in advance by proponents aiming to influence the board like a popularity contest. This special day precedes the Friday when the ICANN board makes its decisions, in public, adopting resolutions on many vital issues.

ICANN Nairobi carries serious expectations by the community of the ICANN Board to stand up and be counted. On the card are the .XXX fiasco, The Expression of Interest, which I and others have called the expression of “Special” Interest as well as on the New gTLDs implementation which is still littered with many unresolved overarching concerns, and not forgetting the Review mechanisms to oversee ICANN performance per the Affirmation of commitments, which may end up being loaded up with ICANN loyalists.

However, this Thursday and this Friday are unlike any of the previous years. They represent crossroads in ICANN’s path that will determine its credibility that will shape its role and influence for years to come under the Beckstrom / Dungate Thrush leaderships. The resolutions ICANN do adopt this Friday or if it chooses to defer decisions on some instead of addressing them squarely will either boost ICANN’s credibility or damage them irreparably.




By Friday 12pm Nairobi time we all should know if the ICANN board and its leadership possess the wisdom and far sightedness of a Solomon or a Joe Blog. Whether they are up to the task, challenge and responsibility bestowed on them by the Affirmation of commitments to rule over the entire global internet will also be known. By noon we will know if they have exhibited the needed leadership, diplomatic, and executive skills and the sincerity to show they can rule over the global internet in a fair, equitable and ubiquitous manner to all its stakeholders from Akron to Afghanistan, from DC to Damascus, from Beijing to Bangalore, delivering on its Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) mandate of ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of all global Internet users as well as promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice.

Most important and most compelling of all other issues in Nairobi is .XXX . No matter how the board acts

ICANN’s credibility will be impacted. If the board instructs staff to execute the 2007 registry contract with ICM, ICANN indirectly admits it was wrong and creates a precedent that its board decisions will be questioned endlessly and can be reversed by an Independent Review panels in the future. If the board chooses not to instruct staff to execute the 2007 contract, it raises serious concerns over the seriousness of the AOC and the review mechanisms over ICANN and the New gTLDs. The board may defer some decisions to a later date citing some excuse in order to gauge a better result and prospect.

But this raises new questions I don’t hear much in the ICANN corridors:

A-Does or doesn’t ICANN consider itself as a “Global Public Service Provider” ?

B-Isn’t ICANN a” Global Monopoly Public Service Provider?

C-As per the AOC, what if ICANN is seen to have failed based on the AOC review panelists?

D-What happens next?

In a competitive market if I am a customer of AT& T and they fail me I switch to sprint or Verizon, it is also called consumer choice. But where is the choice in the ICANN role and what happens if ICANN does fails. Does the community issue statements and press releases calling on ICANN once again to improve it like we have the last ten years. This is hardly choice or competition. ICANN needs to remember the difference between the internet world dealing with it because it respects it and sees it providing a great service as a global monopoly Versus being the only game in town ( the world actually). If ICANN was a service provider in a competitive market, I wonder how many would continue using the ICANN service based on its current levels of “Constituents Satisfaction“ if another one can serve them better, faster, and cheaper. Are Google or Microsoft listening, or should ITU the only one aiming at this role?

Other bloggers / friends who are dissatisfied with ICANN wrote and what I add.

Jonathan Zuck: “But when the Chairman backed away from that stance earlier this week in Nairobi, it became clear that we should have held our breath a little bit longer”.

I say to Jonathan: Stop holding your breath, no human can keep their breath that long, how long have the IDN communities been waiting for IDN gTLDs. ICANN’s rational show a clear monopolistic style of management that knows there is nowhere for you to go and get the service you seek of ICANN anywhere else. Welcome to ICANN style of competition and choice.

Andrew Mack : “A Little Flexibility from ICANN and We Might Just Get IDNs… for Everyone”

I say to Andrew: The little flexibility you hope for in ICANN is like the short distance that appears between stars when you look up to the night sky. In reality these stars are light years apart. And so is ICANN on IDNs for everyone, I can speak on this matter as an expert on IDNs who has served on the ICANN President Advisory Committee on IDNs since its inception in 2005.

I will post my verdict after Friday 12pm Nairobi Time have passed.

Should ICANN New gTLD's' Expression of Interest Be Called Expression of Special Interest?

ICANN has been seeking Comments on the Expression of Interest for the New gTLDs which can be found at http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#draft-eoi

As always, the biggest challenge at ICANN is in the Process itself. And for the record, no one wants New IDN gTLDs rolled out sooner than I do.

However, no matter how ICANN decides to slice up the EOI process with the feedback it receives to make it acceptable or palatable to all current warring parties I cannot see how it can ensure making an EOI process equitable, fair, and ubiquitous to all its stakeholders from Akron to Afghanistan, from DC to Damascus, from Beijing to Bangalore, and delivering on its Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) mandate http://www.icann.org/en/documents/affirmation-of-commitments-30sep09-en.htm of ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of all global Internet users as well as promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice.

ICANN must ensure all have an equal opportunity. They may not all have equal ability, but equal opportunity they all must have, and no less to those in the USA or the western hemisphere with money to ensure their voices can be heard and unlike most in the IDN communities or developing world that have neither money nor a voice for ICANN to hear. That should not mean they don’t exist or they can be ignored.

This is paramount now that ICANN is operating under the new Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) it has sought from the US Government. The AOC calls for a periodic review mechanism of ICANN for these priorities:

1. Ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of global Internet users;
2. Preserving security, stability and resiliency of the DNS;
3. Promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice;
4. Whois policy.

ICANN’s role is that of a "Global Public Service Provider", and is an accepted global monopoly, but as per the AOC, ICANN must ensure accountability, transparency and the interests of all global Internet users as well as competition and fair play to all its constituents. If it can deliver such a process to those without voice or money (IDN Netizens) as equally as to those with voice and money than it has my full support on the EOI. Until this is demonstrated, I do not support the EOI.

Currently both sides of the EOI arguments are entrenched in very typical US centric debates caused by the current ICANN structures, formats and processes. This needs to change, it needs to evolve.

Currently this process is stuck in the old way of doing things at ICANN. ICANN needs to demonstrate it is genuinely trying to alleviate this continued dissatisfaction or distrust in the way it is handling special interests VS global interests where IDNs and IDN gTLDs are given their due merit. As much of the serious concerns from the IDN communities and developing world continue being overlooked and are hardly being touched and if the EOI is adopted, it will apply to IDNs and IDN gTLDs.

The ICANN Board and staff would be well advised to pay special attention to this as these are the true measurements than would determine if ICANN fails or succeeds on its AOC mandates and in bringing the next Multi-Billion Non English speaking / Multilingual Netizens to the Internet. And failure is not an option, as it will always come at the expense of those who CAN’T not those who CAN. I hope ICANN CAN step up to the plate and serve those who CAN’T as mandated.

Finally, failure by ICANN to ensure this fairness, equality, accountability, transparency and the interests of all global Internet users will render the Expression of Interest becoming the Expression of SPECIAL Interest, and would damage ICANN’s own credibility, and that of the US Government who granted it the AOC, not to mention, damage the good faith of some of the sincere EOI supporters.

I hope and look forward to the ICANN board and staff exhibiting the necessary wisdom on this.

Call on ICANN President and CEO Mr. Rod Beckstrom, ICANN and GAC Chairmen to create the "IDNSO" before IDN gTLDs are rolled out.

Below is the full text of Multilingual Internet Group Chairman Khaled Fattal's Letter to ICANN.

October 15, 2009

Mr. Rod Beckstrom, Chief Executive Officer
Mr. Peter Dengate-Thrush, Chairman, Board of Directors
Mr. Doug Brent, Chief Operations Officer
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina Del Rey, CA 90292

Hon. Janis Karklins
Chairman of the Governmental Advisory Committee
Ambassador of Latvia to France
Via email

Members of the Board of Directors
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina Del Rey, CA 90292


Dear Rod, Peter, Doug, Janis and all Board members,

I write to you in my capacity as Chairman and CEO of The Multilingual Internet Names Consortium (MINC) www.minc.org, Member of the ICANN President Advisory Committee on IDNs, (IPAC IDNs) http://www.icann.org/en/committees/idnpac/ , as well as Chairman and CEO of Live Multilingual Translator http://www.lmtranslator.com/ and WebSynergys Inc. http://www.websynergys.com/

I wish to first offer you my sincere congratulation for achieving what all of you and Dr. Paul Twomey, former ICANN President and CEO, had worked very hard to achieve - an independent ICANN accountable to the global Internet community. Achieving this status has had my unwavering support for years, even when it was not popular. Now that this has been accomplished ICANN’s real work must start in earnest.

The Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) is the dawn of a new era and should be celebrated. However, the manner and timeliness in which the AOC is implemented vis-à-vis IDNs and IDN gTLDs; and how fairly, equitably and transparently ICANN and GAC leadership operating within the multi-stakeholder model prioritize them on behalf of the next 4 billion non-English speaking Netizens’ needs and interests, will be ICANN’s biggest challenge and how the success or failure of its model will be measured.

The full responsibility and accountability now lies squarely on ICANN’s shoulders to deliver with safety, stability and security -- not only for the DNS but to the IDN regions who will be severely impacted if corrective measure are not undertaken expediently.

Challenges ahead

Some ICANN challenges may prove harder to overcome due to internal, external and mind set resistances to change which will require structural modification. But change they must. Special interest groups, especially those motivated primarily by profit from the DNS space, strive for greater influence in ICANN processes now that the potential rewards are larger than ever. Their ability to influence ICANN cannot be underestimated if the past is any indication.

ICANN must not forget that, and must demonstrate its commitment to, its primary role -- which is to deliver a global public service and not to act as a business incubator at the expense of the next 4 billion IDN Netizens.

Special Interest and Claims of ICANN Being Captured

The gold rush 21st century style

Proponents and special interest parties well known for being successful entrepreneurs upon ICANN and its new CEO Rod Beckstrom on September 23, 2009 to launch the NEW gTLDs “without any further delays” http://www.icann.org/correspondence/van-couvering-to-beckstrom-21sep09-en.pdf.

I believe that many of the signatories, some whom I know well and consider good friends, are genuine in their sentiments against further delays. But I couldn’t believe that they would advocate a “stampede to launch” without due care as the letter seemed to imply. Days later we all discovered that at least one had their name used as a signatory to that letter without their prior consent http://www.icann.org/correspondence/deerhake-to-beckstrom-30sep09-en.pdf.

In addition, lawsuits have started flying even before new gTLDs have been launched, showcasing an ugly side to this process and a possible specter of the nature of things to come. (Although I hope not).

No one wanted new gTLDs to be launched, especially in IDNs, sooner and faster than me and my constituents. When we called for testing of IDNs in the root in 2003 and 2004 many called us Internet breakers. Yet we cannot support a call for a rush while the steps needed to avert many serious negative outcomes and possible consequences have yet to be achieved.

A captured ICANN?

The Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) called for a full US government audit of ICANN on September 22, 2009 http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/cadna-calls-for-full-scale-audit-of-ICANN , stating: “ICANN is a captured regulator: ICANN's Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), which develops ICANN's policy, is aligned with business models such as registrars and registries that stand to profit or lose from ICANN's choices”.

The DOC Washes its Hands While Congress Raised Concerns

Leaders in the US Congress have also voiced deep concerns. For example, on September 15, 2009 a letter from Lamar Smith and Howard Coble of the House Committee on the Judiciary sent to ICANN President and CEO, Rod Beckstrom, expressed substantial worries regarding the impact of new gTLDs on criminal justice, competition, and intellectual property rights. http://www.icann.org/correspondence/smith-coble-to-beckstrom-15sep09-en.pdf.

And yet the "AOC" clause (5) disavows any responsibility by the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) for the shape or form of how new gTLDs, including IDN gTLDs, are rolled out, stating: “Nothing in this document is an expression of support by DOC of any specific plan or proposal for the implementation of new generic top level domain names (gTLDs) or is an expression by DOC of a view that the potential consumer benefits of new gTLDs outweigh the potential costs”. It is as if the US Government also anticipates lawsuits and is essentially saying: “when things go wrong we are not responsible we passed the full buck on Sep 30th 2009 to ICANN.”

Continued ICANN failures on IDNs and POTENTIAL LITIGATION

Add to all this ICANN’s continued failure to adequately and properly address IDNs over the years, encapsulated in recent months by the manner the IRT was formed by ICANN’s Board. ICANN may face an additional law suit frenzy focused on IDN and IDN gTLDs of international proportions, UNLESS corrective measures are taken, ASAP and before launch, to avert or minimize them..

ICANN board, the IRT, AND Their Lack of IDNs

The IRT’S formation and the strong negative reaction its report received could have been averted, and the substantial efforts by its panelist could have had much greater value, had the ICANN Board and Chairman mandated that IDNs be given proper consideration in its deliberations.

The Board should have also mandated that experts on IDN be selected for the IRT team possessing comprehensive IDN policy, technical, and IP law knowledge and expertise. Had the board mandated this the IRT deliberations would have included IDNs and the final IRT recommendations would have been IDN congruent. Instead, most of the IRT recommendations were virtually incompatible with IDNs and impractical for implementation by their prospective communities.

I raised this concern during the public forum of the ICANN London event in July and was supported by many IRT members on my contention. The record will also show that many IRT members acknowledged this lack of IDN expertise on the IRT team publicly and wished it was also part of their ICANN mandate. It appears that some of my input has been factored in the 3rd version of the Draft Applicant Guidebook (DAG), but much more remains to be addressed.

Unfathomable in 2009

To think that in 2009 the ICANN Board at the leadership of its Chairman, a trademark lawyer, can still approve a resolution to act on anything related to TLD expansion without appropriately factoring in IDNs is unfathomable to me and many members of the IDN regions and the international community. Sadly, this is a manifestation of a continued failure and lack of proper representation and prioritization of IDNs on the ICANN board, and the lack of transparency on the nominating committee that selects the ICANN board members.

The community treatment (or mistreatment) in the Guidebook

Many in the international Internet community would be forgiven if they hoped that the introduction of IDNs would to be done in a way that helped to compensate for the 20 year head start in the domain name market enjoyed by ASCII (English) TLDs, many operated by a small group of for-profit commercial operators who have enjoyed an extremely profitable but effectively closed market that did little to meet the linguistic demands of language communities such as Arabic and Chinese.

We are now faced with a situation however where new IDN gTLD operators hoping to serve the requirements of their communities will have to pay far more than the incumbent gTLD operators ever paid to enter the market. The $185,000 application fee will without a doubt not only act as a considerable barrier but as an obstruction to the deployment of IDN gTLDs to Arabs, Indians or Chinese who want to empower their Netizens to use the Internet in their own languages.

I note that the GAC has come to the same conclusion, urging ICANN to actively consider introducing categories for new gTLDs, given the very different nature of the types of applications ICANN is likely to receive. This is sensible and logical if ICANN is to facilitate the introduction of new gTLDs in a way which reflects the political, cultural and geographic diversity of the Internet. To continue to seek a "one-size-fits-all" approach can only create inequities and result in inappropriate policies for new gTLDs with grave consequences.

Today, the same Arabs, Indians or Chinese who want to empower their Netizens to use the Internet in their own language will be treated in the same manner as applicants for Dot.Gay, claiming to represent the gay community on the Internet (see www.dotgay.com). While I cast no aspersions upon any lifestyle community, it is questionable whether the gTLD application process should treat them and IDN language and culture communities in an indivisible manner.

The Need For Clear Priorities

ICANN’s top priority has been and must remain coordinating the technical management of the DNS to assure its security and stability. An impressive, well-reasoned and extensively documented ICANN-commissioned report on “Scaling the Root”, released on September 18th, clearly lays out the possibility that ICANN is seeking to introduce too many changes to the DNS simultaneously – DNSSEC, IDNs, new gTLDs, and IPv6 -- and that a failure to set clear and intelligent priorities risks major DNS instability.

Were ICANN’s failures's to ignore its own technical inquiries to result in a serious DNS disruption or Internet “crash” ICANN’s very credibility, and its present operational structure, could be placed in serious and permanent jeopardy at the expense of the global Internet community. And if safety and security of the Internet and validated Internet market needs are to be properly prioritized than IDN gTLDs deployment should without a doubt be in the forefront.

Summarizing The challenges and Conclusion

In light of the strength, money and power of the special interest who want to stampede to launch of the new gTLDs and IDN gTLDs “without further delays”, as well as claims that ICANN is a “captured regulator” and that its GNSO “is aligned with business models such as registrars and registries that stand to profit or lose from ICANN's choices”, the ICANN model that many are hailing still faces serious questioning and scrutiny and lacks significant and much needed components to render it functional, at a minimum, on IDNs. Meanwhile, U.S. political leaders have raised great concerns over many issues, while expressing extreme skepticism over the basis for new gTLDs, but have paid scant attention to IDNs.

Now The Question that still daunts the world’s IDN communities

What chance do IDNs have in fulfilling the hopes, needs and aspirations of the more than 4 billion Netizens awaiting IDN gTLDs unless ICANN demonstrates it is willing and capable to make the unavoidable decisions to correct these inequities before serious damage is done?

The Inevitable Answer and The action ICANN Can No Longer Avoid

The time has come for IDNs to take up their rightful place- center stage, without any pressures and biases from special business interests (perceived or real) to fulfill the needs, hopes and aspirations of the people they were aimed at serving first and foremost.

(If still in doubt, please review the 2 IDN ICANN resolutions and why the ICANN Board adopted them during its Puerto Rico meeting http://www.minc.org/news.aspx?id=375&lang=en and which were catalyzed by my public challenge to the ICANN Board the prior day http://www.minc.org/news.aspx?id=374&lang=en that took place in June 2007).

My call on THE ICANN Board and The GAC

The Need For A New ICANN Supporting Organization to be created and named the "IDNSO" (Internationalized Domain Name Supporting Organization)

Adding to my call on the ICANN board during the public comment of ICANN’s Sydney meeting, June 2009, I hereby formalize my call on the ICANN Board to officially create a new ICANN supporting organization called the “IDNSO” (Internationalized Domain Name Supporting Organization).

I also call on the GAC chairman and its members to initiate and conduct a review of my proposal to solicit feedback from the GAC members regarding it.

IDNSO’s Preliminary Mandate, Role, and Structure

As I stated in the past, the IDNSO is to sit side by side with the GNSO (Generic Name Supporting Organization) and the CCNSO (Country Code Name Supporting Organization). All three SOs will operate separately but cooperatively to make policy and technical recommendations under the separate and distinct mandates placed upon them.

Similar to the GNSO, whose mandates are focused primarily on generic TLDs, and the CCNSO’s focus on Country Code TLDs, the IDNSO, whose time has come, will be mandated to provide leadership and feedback on all IDN related matters at all types of TLDs.

All IDN policies in the Gs or the CC’s would then have an opportunity to be made congruent across the G and CC thru the mandates and the recommendations of the IDNSO on what should and should not be recommended on IDNs.

IDNSO linguistic policy formation role for the New IDN gTLDs

The IDNSO will have a unique role in working directly with the IETF on IDN technical matters, and the GAC and the GNSO on IDN policy recommendation matters to the board. The IDNSO will also formalize and create comprehensive ICANN linguistic policies, which alarmingly still do not exist to date at ICANN at any level, despite the linguistics ICANN sound bites references in its communiqués.

These IDNSO linguistic policies are a must to satisfy the acceptance and respect of the local language communities’ linguistic and cultural needs and concerns about their languages, which are an extension and integral expression of their identities, in the short, medium and long term prior to rolling out the new IDN gTLDs. The current ICANN plans will allow any “Tom, Dick or Harry” to apply and be authorized to operate an IDN gTLD with little or no say from the local IDN community.

IDNSO role on the New IDN gTLDs and Review mechanism post JPA

The IDNSO’s role will be the missing link to a community supported homeopathic rolling out of the New IDN gTLDs. It will prove equal if not more essential to satisfying the technical requirements for a single global interoperable Internet when IDNs are launched. Moreover, it will prove incalculable in helping the GAC and ICANN post JPA in their review mechanisms per the AOC.

More details on IDNSO

More details are available on the proposed structure and mode of operation, and on the selection and elections of interim and future IDNSO board members, has been prepared -- and I will share these details when formal and proper consultations are initiated by the Board and senior ICANN staff in response to my call.

Conclusion

I have no doubt that some may not support such modification to the ICANN structure for a multitudes of reasons, least of all special interest or lack of awareness, but if ICANN is to deliver on its mandate and serve all current as well as future 4+ billion Netizens of the world, the majority of whom will come from the IDN regions, and do it effectively, fairly, equitably, homeopathically and congruently in a manner that will withstand the test of time over the coming decades of the twenty-first century and beyond, this change is unavoidable.

Suffice it to say, absent the creation of the IDNSO in an expedient and timely fashion, and prior to the launch of the new IDN gTLDs, so that all matters with IDNs are addressed in a manner reflecting the needs and aspirations of the IDN local communities and their current and future Netizens first and foremost, the current plans for IDN gTLDs may well cause incalculable damage to the Internet and its DNS at the expense of the communities they were originally intended to serve first and foremost.

Looking forward to your replies, and to observing your actions on the above during the Seoul meeting.

Warmest regards,


Khaled Fattal

Chairman of the Board of Directors, and CEO, MINC, The Multilingual Internet Names Consortium, http://www.minc.org/
Chairman and CEO, Live Multilingual Translator http://www.lmtranslator.com/
Chairman and CEO, WebSynergys Inc. http://www.websynergys.com/
ICANN President's Advisory Committee Member on IDNs (ICANN) http://www.icann.org/en/committees/idnpac

Will Obama's Speech From Cairo Make Any Difference to The Muslims Of The World? Are Muslims and Arabs Ready To Trust America Yet? If Not? Why Not?

Without a doubt this was the most impressive speech by a US President in decades addressing Arabs and Muslims. However, bearing in mind that the speech is to serve US strategic interests with the objective of aligning 1.5 billion Muslims around the world to stand by the side of America in its fight against Al-Qaida and Islamic extremism, this is most definitely a good start, but only a start.

A lot remains to be proven and done for Muslims to trust and believe in the sincerity of a  US President or a US Administration if history taught them anything at all. I believe Obama "the man" is sincere. But is the US Administration sincere? Or is this a new way to deal with Muslims who are more often thinking with their passions rather than with their intellect.

So, will Obama be able to deliver on his commitments and his wonderful words?

Muslims and Arabs have been hearing “words” for 60 years. What they need to see is tangible US and Israeli changes supported by positive actions. Expecting trust and more concessions from Arabs and Muslims before anything happens is not the way forward. Netanyahu can't even say the words “two state solution".

President Obama also neglected to quote the Quraan where it says Muslims have the right to fight oppression and occupation of their lands. Arabs and Muslims have not forgotten that.

The French were called champions and freedom fighters for fighting against their Nazi German occupiers during WWII, and with whatever means available to them the world acknowledged. So did America against its colonial British masters two centuries ago, also, by any means available. Why are the occupied and oppressed Palestinians being seen and treated differently?

I believe that the death of any innocent child is a tragedy, regardless whether Jewish, Arab or Muslim. And while I go on the record stating that I don’t support the killing of innocent Israeli women and children, President Obama should also denounce the massacres of more than a thousand Palestinian woman and children in Gaza recently by the Israeli forces with American weapons during the last days of President Bush administration. Such actions also cannot be defended no matter what the excuses. Obama remained silent during the attacks. Muslims and Arabs did not forget that.

And did the President forget that the nuclear arms race in the Middle East already started many years ago caused when Israel obtained them with the help of the US. Did he forget that Israel refuses to be a signatory to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty? Why does he not call for a nuclear free Zone Middle East, en route to a World without all Nuclear Weapons.

Also, what President Obama needed to explain in his speech is how he will reconcile the two opposing positions that are the real road blocks to peace.

On the one hand, there is the indisputable legitimate human right of Palestinians. Obama acknowledged this as well as their suffering for decades in his speech. But he did not acknowledge that to resist occupation and oppression against an occupiers is recognized the world over as a legitimate human right. It is also a religious duty of a Muslim to resist oppression and occupation.

On the other hand, Israel continues not to recognize that Palestinians are humans with human rights, and that they are people under its occupation. It labels any actions of resistance, a legitimate human right against occupation, be it military or civilian uprising, as terrorism with usual US unshakable support.

Israel responds to such claims that they withdrew from Gaza hence Gaza is not under occupation. As if the Palestinians in Gaza are free by any stretch of the imagination. Israel has locked them up in a virtual prison in the most inhumane way, and the world knows it. It controls all passages and all supplies to 1.5 million Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Israel then uses any resistance as a pretext for why Palestinians cannot be trusted followed by more Israeli military action or blockade to punish the occupied Palestinians into more pain, suffering, and submission, all in the name of self defense.

Muslims see this as a clear Israeli-US plan to make the Palestinians surrender any resistance to force them to agree to peace terms dictated by their over powering occupier helped and supported by the US. This has been going on for decades and continued despite the Oslo Peace Accord of the 90s.

To be positive, the speech is unique in many ways. I support his call for a stop to all acts of violence and terrorism. Time for the bloodshed to stop once and for all. But this should includes the bombing of Israeli civilian targets by Hamas as well as the Israeli government ceasing the oppression of all occupied Palestinians especially the more than 1.5 million Palestinians on the Gaza strip in a the most heavily populated piece of a few square miles on earth, both must stop immediately not Palestinian resistance alone.

Are these people who have been occupied for 60 years and who are without hope or choice expected to abandon their legitimate human right and the teaching of their religion to resist oppression and the occupation of their land, rights that France and America both invoked in their quest for freedom, just because of a great sounding speech? Only the day before Obama’s speech an Israeli minister blatantly challenged Obama that Israel will not stop building settlements on Palestinian occupied land in a clear rebuke and challenge to President Obama's call for all these settlement to stop immediately.

Palestinians have suffered for too long and have been lied to by too many, endured the indignity of occupation, destitution, and living in make shift shelters in refugee camps with tin roofs generation after generation need to see a lot more before they can trust. They have to be given more than just words to go on.

The truth is that all indicators show, as I believed, that the majority of Arabs and Muslims do like Obama as a man. They feel he is sincere, but they also believe he will not be able to pressure Israel or be able to stand up to the pressure by Israel and its lobby back in America.

This is Obama’s real challenge and his real opportunity to prove that “yes, he can”. If he can show he can make Israel change its thinking that Palestinians are also humans and deserve the same dignity and freedom as any Israeli than real long lasting peace has a chance at succeeding.

Future of Internet Governance: Towards an Accountable ICANN. And Moving Towards An Internationalized Internet Governance.

On May 5th, Mrs. Viviane Reding, EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media, posted a video calling for an oversight by the international community when the ICANN MOU with the US Government (JPA) expires September 09. She also sounded her serious concerns over the US Government's singular oversight over ICANN and ICANN's monopolistic stance with a call on President Obama to act. Will he?

"A moment of truth will come on 30 September this year, when the current agreement between ICANN and the US Government expires. This opens the door for the full privatisation of ICANN." she said . Her video was titled: Future of Internet Governance: Towards an Accountable ICANN.

Much of Mrs. Reding positions echo my many statements over the years regarding the ICANN / USG's monopolistic management of the as well as the JPA. As Chairman and CEO of MINC, The Multilingual Inyernet Names Consortium, I have called for the transitioning to an international community structure that is streamlined, effective with minimal bureaucracies possible at many international forums like the United Nations conferences of the WSIS, WGIG, IGF, at ICANN conferences, as well as thru US Government and ICANN consultations.

I always took the position that for any good, effective, representative and democratic Internet Governance to take shape the players and decision makers of the internet need to be accountable to not only a single government or organization but to the international community itself with transparency being of the highest standard.

With the authority to affect so many lives beyond traditional political borders there needs to be democratic and representative accountabilities beyond a single country control. And while I recognize that the US has performed this task admirably, I also believe that it is now time for the US government to replace its monopolistic role with ICANN and IANA in the management of the Internet with a leadership collaborative role with the rest of the international community.

I agree with Commissioner Reding’s points on ICANN and internationalizing Internet Governance. However, some parts of her proposal will need time and multilateral and multi-cultural collaborations with pressure to happen. Nevertheless, the foundation of what must be aimed at has to be crystal clear, and her position helps do that.

One of the challenges will be to show how this will not hinder innovation. I anticipate that those in the business sector who want a 100% private and business led ICANN model to continue unchanged, unregulated will claim this will hinder innovation and curtail freedom of expression - as if such freedoms should exist without personal, corporate and Multicultural Social Responsibilities.

Huge lessons should be learnt from the global banking and financial crisis where too much Laisser Faire and self regulation fostered greed and conflicts of interest at monumental proportions.

I recommend to readers to read MINC’s announcement on Mrs. Reding’s video and to send us comments about it at http://minc.org/news.aspx?id=410&lang=en. And remember to click on the read MINC in Arabic at the top of the page to see all MINC's announcements including the one about her video translated to Arabic in seconds, in front of your own eyes. This is what Arabic speakers who don’t speak English have been doing to follow on these developments.

What is alarming and should not go unnoticed is that the internet community has dragged its feet, by design or by ignorance, since the end of the WSIS summit in 2005. In the last 2 years particularly, no one seemed willing, at ICANN and IGF conferences to table any serious discussions and debates of significant levels on what to transition to, once the JPA expires this September 30th. It seems as if it was a white elephant that is sitting in the middle of your living room yet you go on pretending it does not exist.

I alerted and called on IGF Chairman Mr. Desai in February 2008 at the Geneva IGF conference that this subject should be tabled and made a priority at IGF, I am sad to say, it was not. This is also documented in MINC's announcement at http://minc.org/news.aspx?id=408&lang=en. Now we are in the 11th hour and there is too much to do, and very little time to do them.

EU Commissioner Reding’s address to President Obama is the correct diplomatic challenge and approach. President Obama has an opportunity to show that "Change" has come not only to America, which delivered him to the White House, but that this "Change" has come to the world to replace the divisive rhetoric of the Bush era.

I also believe, however, that this alone will not be enough to make President Obama act accordingly. International community support at Multi-cultural as well as, at grass root levels has to be coordinated and heard, especially from the non-English, non-Latin based language communities of the world (IDN communities) calling and supporting Mrs Reding and my repeated calls to Internationalize Internet Governance, and conducted with a serious sense of urgency befitting the looming deadline of September 30th, 2009 and the minimal change that await beyond it.

For example, the current Internet Governance is a non-committing and non-binding forum. So it cannot provide effective and regulated Internet Governance.

On the other hand, if unchanged, the ICANN Business led model that failed will continue to fail to deliver on many of its mandates of transparency and accountability. The new gTLDs program has become so contentious, supporting communities like the Trade Mark Association, the Business Constituency (BC), and the Intellectual Property Community (IPC) to name a few, and which have always been traditional ICANN supporters are now some of its biggest critics.

New mechanisms of cooperation are much needed between national law enforcement agencies around the world to combat current and future cyber wars, cyber terrorism, child pornography, spam, IP protection, and many others international challenges. It is true some of these are not part of the ICANN mandate, but nor are they the mandate of anyone else at present. Clearly, new enforceable mechanisms of cooperation and treaties will have to be created to replace and / or add to a new JPA. The US Administration may wish to consider mandating other international coordinating bodies to do some of these roles to minimize the ICANN monopolistic position it is in today.

Despite all these let downs, ICANN supporters who don’t want any change to the current ICANN model which has served them well insist on using statements like: " if it ain't broke, don’t fix it".

In closing, I believe we must aim at delivering a Truly Internationalized Internet Governance that is Representative and Democratic, but most of all, Accountable to all those it stands to Represent, Govern and Impact.

Failure cannot be an option, if we are to prevent what happened in the global banking and financial sectors from happening to the Internet. This will pale in comparison when we factor the prospect of cyber wars and cyber terrorism ramifications. Nations and citizens who depend most on Internet stability and security will be the ones at most and greatest risks.

Torture Advocates will Set the Military Back for Generations

This Article is posted in support of and courtesy of Brandon Friedman, Author of The War I Always Wanted, and Vice Chairman of VoteVets.org:

Know what these photos are?

These are Iraqi troops surrendering by the thousand to U.S. forces during the first Gulf War in 1991. These drafted Iraqi fighters chose to turn themselves over to Americans in droves because they knew they'd be treated better by U.S. troops than by their own government. They had faith in us that we wouldn't execute them, that we'd feed them and give them water, and that we'd provide them with shelter. To them, facing capture was a much better option than either retreating back to the care of Saddam and his sadistic sons or of fighting to the death.

This worked out well, because it meant that we, as Americans, wouldn't have to face a determined, cornered enemy that could've drawn out the war and inflicted unnecessary casualties on our side. It was seen as a great victory.

Know what this is?

This is a shot of German troops surrendering to Americans during World War Two. At the end of that war, German soldiers were so desperate to surrender to the Americans or the British that they actually fought to break out of areas on the Eastern Front just so they wouldn't have to surrender to the Russians. They knew that inhumane treatment, a long train ride to Siberia, and a likely miserable death awaited them if they didn't make it.

This also worked out well for us, because it meant that we, as Americans, had a much easier time in Germany than the Russians did. The Russians--battling men who were literally fighting for their lives during the push to Berlin--suffered 80,000 troops killed. On the Western Front, however, U.S. forces never faced that level of resistance.

Once upon a time, America was known around the world for its powerful, benevolent nature when handling captured enemy fighters. Even our adversaries knew they could hoist the white flag and expect to be treated humanely. In turn, this made them more likely to give up sooner. And it not only kept American soldiers out of countless bloody fights, but it made victory and success all that much easier for our troops.

For years, rank and file soldiers and insurgents around the world viewed surrender to the Americans as a reasonable option when finding themselves outgunned.

And then we went and did this:

Now, our opponents won't feel secure in surrendering to U.S. forces. In fact, I wouldn't expect to see images like those of the surrendering soldiers above for decades. It's just not going to happen anymore. If a hot war breaks out in Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, or anywhere else, we can expect to face an enemy that simply won't accept surrender. No Taliban fighter, no starving North Korean soldier in his right mind will surrender willingly if he thinks he's going to be tortured or beaten to death. Instead, he'll prefer a fight to the death, even as he becomes cornered. And this will get Americans killed.

This is what Bush administration torture policies have wrought. We no longer hold the moral high ground. We borrowed against it in an effort to get a few false confessions from Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, Abu Zubaydah, and others. And the next time we face an organized fighting force in the field, the cost of doing so will become readily apparent.

Not only does torture not work, but it directly endangers our troops fighting now.

This is Posted in support and courtesy of Brandon Freidman.

This posting can be read at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brandon-friedman/torture-advocates-will-se_b_194316.html