September 9, 2000* Dear NC member As you know, I am one of the four candidates for the DNSO seat on the ICANN board. For those who don't know me, I am the Director of the Consumer Project on Technology. http://www.cptech.org. I have also created a page for the DNSO election here: http://www.cptech.org/jamie/dsno-icann.html, which contains links to my personal home page and comments on various ICANN issues. This is probably more than you want to know, but if you have any questions, send me a note at love@cptech.org. I would like give a brief argument in favor of my candidacy. For many Internet users, ICANN is thought of as being too much controlled by big business interests, and too indifferent to free speech and the rights of individuals or other civil society concerns. If the Names Council sent me to the ICANN board, it would send a signal that ICANN will represent a more diverse set of voices. By putting an ICANN critic on the board, ICANN would show that it can tolerate criticism. This would benefit ICANN. I hope that having a strong voice for civil society concerns would also help ICANN avoid decisions that are particularly off putting to the public, such as a UDRP policy that does not protect free speech, lack of concern over legitimate privacy interests, or things like the $50,000 non-refundable fee for *all* testbed TLD applications, to mention only a few issues. With respect to issues that concern DNSO constituencies, I would like to offer the following comments. 1. Intellectual Property Constituency I believe it is appropriate to protect trademark rights in domain names, but only subject to appropriate limits, and ICANN should also avoid anticompetitive policies. I do not think that trademark owners will benefit, in the long run, from efforts to create "super" trademark rights in domain names, or by restricting the growth of new TLDs. The expansion of the root should solve many trademark concerns, by providing greater distinctiveness in the name space, and create room for restricted domains controlled by various interest groups. 2. Business Constituency. I don't think it is in the business constituency interest to push to have ICANN as a powerful Internet regulator. Businesses have benefited from the past open and relatively free nature of the Internet. There are some that want ICANN to have a tight grip on the Internet, and if they are successful, ICANN would become the source of endless problems for everyone. I am in favor of various ways to limit ICANN's mission and power. 3. ISP constituency. The ISP constituency should oppose, as I do, the overly broad and anticompetitive outcomes of many UDRP proposals, the IPC proposals on trademark protection in new TLDs, and the artificial restrictions on the TLD name space. IPCs should also be concerned about ICANN's power in other areas. I share these concerns. 4. gTLD constituency. NSI has had too much monopoly power in the registry business, and I support efforts to create new competition for NSI. But as a gTLD, NSI should be concerned, as I am, about the possibility that ICANN will want to micro-manage new TLDs. 5. Registry constituency. Many registries have assumed that trademark interests are so strong they have to agree to overly broad protections in the UDRP to avoid litigation. I think this is a mistake, and that it is worth rallying user interests to press for better UDRP policies. The registries should not consider the past as a roadmap to the future in terms of what the user interests can do in terms of influence in the US Congress or WIPO. The registries should not encourage ICANN to become a highly regulatory agency. The registries should support a large expansion of the root for new TLDs. 6. ccTLD constituency. If national government indeed have the practical ability to control ccTLDs, then there is little reason for ICANN to manage the ccTLDs. The ccTLDs should not be paying high fees to ICANN, and with the exception of very narrow technical issues, ICANN should not interfere with the ccTLD operations. The ccTLDs should make their own policies on issues such as trademarks, copyright protection, privacy and other matters. Public concerns about these issues should be addressed to the relevant national governments, or ccTLD registry self governance organizations, but not to ICANN. I am in favor of decentralization and diversity as ways of avoiding anyone exercising too much control over the Internet, and think the ccTLDs have similar interests. 7. Non-Commerical Constituency. I have been an active member of the NCC discussion lists, where a wide range of civil society concerns have been discussed. The NCC voters should consider if it is important for the ICANN board to have a strong voice for NGO interests and the rights of individuals, for free speech, for privacy and freedom, and other NCC concerns, and which candidates are likely to emphasize these issues. Thank you for your consideration of my candidacy. Sincerely, James Love Director, Consumer Project on Technology love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org http://www.cptech.org/jamie/dnso-icann.html v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 * Stamped Septembr 8 in mail due to clock error.