Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

FairWinds Partners

3,524 bytes removed, 7 years ago
no edit summary
==ICANN Involvement==
FairWinds is a observatory member of the [[BC|Business Constituency]] within ICANN. The firm is represented by Phil, who was also and a voting member of the [[NomCom|Nominating Committee]] New TLD Applicant Group (NomComNTAG) in 2009.<ref>[http://www.fairwindspartners.com/en/about-us/management-team FairWinds Management team]</ref>Josh and Phil are actively involved in the different activitiesRegistry Stakeholder Group, meetings and policy development process of the [[ICANN]] through CADNA. In 2009, Josh, who serves as President of CADNA, asked the United States government to conduct a full-scale audit on ICANN's structure, governance and oversight mechanisms. According to him, "ICANN is broken" and his reasons why it is necessary to examine the operations of the international Internet governing body which included:<ref>[http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/cadna-calls-for-full-scale-audit-of-ICANN CADNA Calls since they applied for Full-Scale Audit of ICANN]</ref>* The [[GNSO|Generic Names Supporting Organization]] (GNSO), which is responsible in developing ICANN policy, does not represent the needs and interest of internet users with accuracy and fairness.* ICANN is not independent because it follows the proposals of policy making groups and it lacks internal accountability mechanism to ensure honest operations,* ICANN is not transparent, avoiding public accountability by not disclosing the transcripts of board meetings.* ICANN is more interested in making a profit than working for the benefit of Internet users by raising fees on domain name registration and renewals* ICANN is not accessibleFAIRWINDS. The general public and internet users are not properly informed about the operations of the internet governing body.* ICANN fails to address numerous issues that corrupts the internet particularly the safety and stability of the internet and the inaccuracy of information of the [[Whois]] database.* ICANN's proposed gTLD expansion program firm is poorly conceived. Appropriate and cost-effective security and risk analysis was not conducted.* ICANN is risking cybersecurity, national security, and global security represented by expanding the numebr of gTLDs through its harmful policies.* ICANN is not looking at itself critically* ICANN's relationship with the US government does not span all relevant agencies and suggested that the Department of Homeland Security should have joint jurisdiction over the [[Joint Project Agreement]] and [[IANA]] contract with the [[DOC|Department of Commerce]]. In 2011, CADNA also actively provided comments and suggestions regarding ICANN's new [[gTLD]] expansion program particularly on the issue of .brand gTLDs. The advocacy group asked ICANN to determine a schedule for the second round of Applications for new gTLDs to ease the pressure and anxiety among brand ownersStephanie Duchesneau. In a statement, Josh said, "The fact that ICANN has only offered one opportunity to apply for new gTLDs has created a sense of chaos among brands, who feel as though ICANN is forcing them into making a 'now or never' decision that could impact both them and their consumers. Knowing that they will have the opportunity to apply again after having the chance to see if new gTLDs become valuable will go a long way toward relieving that anxiety." <ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cadna-submits-proposal-to-icann-aimed-at-improving-new-gtld-program-for-brands-2011-11-18 CADNA Submits Proposal to ICANN Aimed at Improving New gTLD Program for Brands]</ref> Josh previously commented that ICANN failed to accomplish some of its responsibilities in the Affirmation of Commitments with United States [[DOC|Department of Commerce]].<ref>[http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cadna-asserts-that-the-icann-affirmation-of-commitments-falls-short-62946522.html CADNA Asserts That The ICANN Affirmation of Commitments Falls Short]</ref>
==References==

Navigation menu