Joint Meeting: ICANN Board and NCSG - ICANN67

AGENDA: 

AREAS OF INTEREST:

1. The NCSG, reflecting the views of civil society generally, would like to comment on a few recent events at ICANN that have raised alarm bells in terms of the ongoing affordability and sustainability of an open, free, and vigorous DNS.  The first of these is the impending sale of .ORG.  We did not raise our concerns about the removal of price caps, although a significant proportion of our community were dead against this action.  Many others had faith in .ORG, and trusted their commitments, We were disappointed to learn of the sale in the manner in which  we did, so soon after the removal of the price caps.  As you know, there has been a broad ranging discussion on this topic, and we would like to compare notes with you.
2. The second issue is the removal of price caps for .com.  Since .com still accounts for 80% of GTLD registrations, how can ICANN justify the removal of price caps for such a monopoly registry?
3. The third issue we want to highlight is the cost of the impending SSAD being developed by the EPDP, bearing in mind that the benefits of this system have not been balanced against costs, and many of the decisions which are required for  the high volume requests CANNOT be automated.  Is the cost of this white elephant justified?  We have raised many objections to some of the aspects of this machine we are tasked with designing, from the moment that it was first discussed in the charter drafting process. 
4. Another topic we wish to raise is the ongoing sustainability of the MS model.  You have hinted in the past that travel costs and concern about our carbon footprint may dictate fewer face to face meetings.  Given the growing complexity of the policy work  (cf. the EPDP, which comes on the heels of the RDS working group, an exhausting debate highlighted by limited progress and much disagreement) we doubt that we can produce good results without face to face meetings.  We applaud and thank the staff and the community for responding quickly to the crisis precipitated by the cancellation of the CANCUN meeting, but it is very clear that this meeting is a pale shadow of a normal ICANN public meeting.  Given the strong possibility that ICANN68 will also have to be cancelled due to the Corona virus situation, may we suggest that a study group be struck to make recommendations about how to improve these virtual meetings and make them more accessible to all global players?  We are very concerned that there is insufficient community engagement and consultation on key decisions, and that we are really going to have to work hard together to figure out how to be more truly global and inclusive in our approach to virtual meetings.