AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

At-Large Reports

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large Priority Activities - 2021

Comment Close
Date		Statement
Name 

Status

Assignee(s)

Call for
Comments Open		Call for
Comments
Close 		Vote OpenVote CloseDate of SubmissionStaff Contact and EmailStatement Number
 

New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper

ADOPTED 15Y, 0N, 0A

Main penholder: Eduardo Diaz

Assisted by: Carlton Samuels

   23:59 UTC 23:59 UTC   23:59 UTC 
Marika Konings
policy-staff@icann.org
AL-ALAC-ST-1015-02-00-EN

For information about this Public Comment, please click here 

Brief Overview

Purpose: This is a discussion paper [PDF, 455 KB] on the proceeds from ICANN-conducted auctions for contested new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) strings. This paper calls for broad, open and inclusive public comment and encourages participation from all sectors, regions and levels (or no level) of engagement with the ICANN community.

Current Status: This paper aims to capture the information and input on this topic to date as well as outlining potential questions and issues to be addressed in the subsequent phases of the process to determine next steps in relation to new gTLD Auction Proceeds.

Next Steps: This discussion paper is published for public comment in order to allow for additional input before this paper is submitted to the drafting team, which is expected to be tasked with developing a proposed charter for a Cross-Community Working Group for consideration, unless another approach is suggested as part of the public comment period and which is then deemed preferable.

Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose

Since the launch of the new gTLD Program, numerous suggestions have been made, such as during the ICANN public forum sessions at ICANN meetings, on how new gTLD auction proceeds should be spent including; suggestions that the funds should be donated to charitable organizations, support for applicants in future rounds, programs to promote new gTLDs and consumer protection, the creation of an ICANN trust, to returning the money to the applicants from the current round. However, it was not until March 2015 that the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) started discussing a possible process for facilitating the conversation around new gTLD auction proceeds during ICANN52 such as a Cross-Community Working Group (CCSG). The discussion paper [PDF, 455 KB] aims to capture the information and input on new gTLD Auction Proceeds to date as well as outlining potential questions and issues to be addressed in the subsequent phases of the process, such as outreach, participation and ensuring a focus on framework development, to determine next steps.

Broad, open and inclusive public comment input is sought and participation from all sectors, regions and levels (or no level) of engagement with the ICANN community is encouraged.

Section II: Background

The new gTLD Program established auctions as a mechanism of last resort to resolve string contention. Most string contentions (approximately 90% of sets scheduled for auction) have been resolved through other means before reaching an auction conducted by ICANN's authorized auction service provider, Power Auctions LLC. It was recognized from the outset that significant funds could accrue as a result of several auctions. As such, these auction proceeds have been reserved and earmarked until the Board authorizes a plan for the appropriate use of the funds through dialogue with the community. Board, staff, and community are expected to be working together in designing and participating in the next steps addressing the use of newgTLD auction proceeds. 13 contention sets have been resolved via ICANN Auction since June 2014. The total net proceeds to date are $58.8 million USD. Details of the proceeds can be found at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/auctions/proceeds.

Section III: Relevant Resources

Section IV: Additional Information

Section V: Reports

Staff Contact

Marika Konings
policy-staff@icann.org

 

FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED

Click here to download the Statement below.

 


FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC

The ALAC is in general accordance with the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper. We believe that the approach of creating a drafting team to develop a charter for a Cross-Community Working Group on the new gTLD Auction Proceeds is the right one.

We recommend that the drafting team is made up of at least 2 persons per chartering SO/AC and with representation from all SO/ACs that indicate an interest. 

The ALAC further recommends that any charter reported broadly: 1) affirms the principles of openness and transparency in allocation of funds, 2) embraces the concept that the use of the auction proceeds should be in tune with the ICANN Strategic Plan; and 3) must favour extending the global public interest in concrete ways and endowing the Affirmation of Commitments, especially as they converge on consumer trust and confidence in the Domain Name System.

FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED

The ALAC is in general accordance with the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Discussion Paper.  We believe that the approach of creating a drafting team to develop a charter for a Cross-Community Working Group on the new gTLD Auction Proceeds (CCWG oN GAP) is the right one.  We recommend that the drafting team is made up of at least 2 people per chartering AC/SO.  The ALAC further recommends that any charter reported explicitly embrace the concept that use of the auction proceeds must favour extending in concrete ways the global public interest and endowing the Affirmation of Commitments, especially as they converge on consumer trust and confidence in the Domain Name System.

  • No labels

8 Comments

  1. Avri Doria

    How about a proposal that they use it for a remedial round, before any subsequent rounds, for developing economies (least developed & developing) and indigenous peoples?

    1. Alan Greenberg

      I would think that this is a subject for the CCWG and not the an issue at this stage.

       

  2. Alan Greenberg

    Eduardo, your reference to the composition of the CWG Stewardship sounds like the composition of the the CWG and not the drafting team that wrote the Charter.

    Normally Charter drafting teams are quite ad hoc with people with an interest volunteering (typically the group is not that large). For the CWG-Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability, the membership of the charter drafting team was a bit more formal, with (I think) 2 people per chartering AC/SO. I think our reps were Tijani and Leon, and you may want to verify with them, or just check the documentation for the charters.

    I have no strong feeling if this one should be as formal as the CWG/CCWG, but we certainly do want at least one person and perhaps two on the drafting team.

    The Charter itself will determine the composition of the resultant CCWG.

    1. Eduardo Diaz

      Alan, you are right in thinking that I was referring to the actual CCWG. I agree that charter groups should be smaller. I will adjust the statement to indicate that as a minimum there should be two people from each interested So/AC organization. Thanks.

  3. Holly Raiche

    We should make a few points in response:

    The proceeds should be for the ICANN community (and not charitable organisations that have nothing to do with ICANN)

    The proceeds should be used to reach out to the community - including education and  support for IDNs and support for communities/applicants from the areas that are not represented/not well represented now (APAC areas/Africa)

    On process

    The principles for allocation should be

    • broad, open and transparent processes
    • no conflicts of interest
    • all ICANN communities involved

    So if there is to be a CCWG, as proposed, it must not be weighted towards any one community - but include reps from all SO/ACs

    Again, there are studies that are coming up with results now - could we please not charge ahead with this until all the information is in and there is time in the communities to seriously consider all the information/issues

    1. Carlton Samuels

      I think you will see we accepted your sense of this by the changes in the language.

       

      Carlton

  4. Dev Anand Teelucksingh

    I suggest that any proposed charter should embrace the concept that use of the auction proceeds should be to fulfill the implementation of ICANN's  Strategic Plan for 2016-2020 (https://www.icann.org/strategicplan) which I think would capture our key concern areas.

    I know this isn't about ideas about what to do with auction funds but just to capture two possible ideas for the future

    • support of Internet Archive (https://archive.org/web/) - which documents the history of websites at domains over time. Websites are possibly the primary use of domain names and there is no sense of what was done with domains in the past.
    • countering the environmental impact of ICANN activities - because of the substantial travel of ICANN board, staff  and community to 3 ICANN F2F events and smaller meetings, ICANN impacts the environment in terms of CO2 emissions. ICANN should offset those CO2 emissions.

     

  5. Glenn McKnight

    My favourite  suggestion for use of the  Proceeds is Creating a Foundation to Inform the Global Public on Internet Governance

    as  submitted by Klaus Stoll, Public Forum, ICANN 48

    This  suggestion has a specific  focus and its legal structure as a  Foundation has merit, similar to  PEW and Open Society efforts. This group can help develop, nurture and promote  Internet Goverance to a much broader community rather than the current  limited  Summer School concept  It  can also fun research in topics that need clarification and advanced  thinking.  Secondly it can produce online course materials which would be  Open Education  and provided free creating  the  next generation of  thinkers on this topic

    Glenn