Re: [wg-review] Intake from the GA ML

[brianappleby@netscape.net]

Dear Working Group Compatriots,

My thoughts lean towards the pragmatic and simplistic but I don’t think that is a negative in this case. 

What is lacking in ICANN is accountability and responsibility.  

As the child of the Dept. of Commerce, ICANN is only currently and ultimately accountable to the US federal government.  Just because we don’t want it to be this way in the future does not make it untrue today.  

Who created ICANN?  

Who has the power to fundamentally alter it?  

Who can replace if it is necessary?

Most importantly, who can force ICANN to live up to the promises it made?

If I don’t answer these rhetorical questions here it will probably cause confusion: it is the US government.

Many of the problematic issues we now suffer with were raised and addressed during testimonies to US Congress.  (I can hunt down the links but I’m sure others have them on very handy and can share their references).  

Roughly and simply from memory, ICANN leaders promised to open up elections for the BoD seats on a specific time frame.  A promise which was not lived up to and indeed is in jeopardy with the clean-slate review of the @Large membership/elections policies.

Promises were made to US Congress that open competition would prevail, replacing the monopoly relationship ICANN had (still has) with NSI.  Another promise which came up short.

Promises were made before approval was granted (or lack of dis-approval) but where is Congress now that the promises they received have become lies and empty words?  

The US government has a role to play to help set things right again so that many of the sub-issues can be dealt with as they should have been in the first place.  An obvious example is the requirement of ensuring new constituencies are taken seriously and allowed to be recognized as legitimate, having gone through the prescribed process outlined in ICANN’s own rulebooks.  

I’m not saying the US government should take control.  But they can make sure ICANN follows the rules.

The people, everyone everywhere, should have top authority and priority for all future Internet policy decisions and organizational requirements.  I’m saying Congress should do a clean-slate review of the realities as they exist today as compared to the original promises and assurances.  Once the machine (ICANN organization/operations) is running smoother, we can use the newly leveled playing field as a more firm foundation to extend and fully internationalize the organization itself.   

OK it is true, we can’t expect to much either but give a Congressional representative/Senator a good issue to run with, they’ll play to public sentiment while they make themselves famous in the process, it can be a win-win-win situation.  Through effective organization of people such as ourselves into a united political force (inclusive for everyone, not just US voters) we can help shape the process by more fairly defining the issues themselves (PR stuff) and educating the public as to what is fair and right and just.  

Ultimately the organizations which govern the Internet must be inclusive and truly international with the best interests of all as their guiding vision.  I think it will take years in best-case scenarios to create a truly international and functional organization to effectively be up and running to replace a US-based ICANN organization – this must be done, but as everyone has seen, there is a lot, and I mean a whole lot, of discussion, debate, power struggling, etc. to be done before a good international organization can be built from the ground up. 

Best Regards to all,
Brian Appleby
brianappleby@netscape.net

"Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rod@cyberspaces.org> wrote:
>
> 
> It might be a good idea to have one nation's legislature -- particularly the
> U.S. Congress -- perform oversight of ICANN's current activities, but this
> may not be a prudent long term solution, and we should be cautious in
> considering the matter.
> Rod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    >>The people are everyones constituency and the source of all power.
>    >>
>    >>But frankly, I believe what we need to stop the dike from bursting, a
>    >crisis of the short-term, is for top-down change in the form of
> dedicated,
>    >educated US Congressional oversight with a splash of judicial-esque
>    >judgement.  I think a permanent Congressional sub-committee needs to be
>    >established whos primary role and responsibility is to ensure that ICANN
>    >remains faithful to the commitments it made when it was established and
>    >that the stated ideals are maintained and the goals are achieved.
>    >>
>    >
>    >I used the same dam bursting analogy  talking to Pindar Wong, who spoke
> for
>    >the @large committee in Melbourne. He was aware, so  ICANN must be aware
> of
>    >this crisis potential too.
>    >This is why they have called on a heavyweight like Carl Bildt to act as
>    >judge in the coming fight about @large representation. The Board is now
>    >divided.
>    >
>    >>A blind man could easily see how far away ICANN has wandered from the
> path
>    >which was set for them.  It is possible that the US Congress might even
> be
>    >able to see it too?
>    >>
>    >Yes, the interim Board driven  ICANN has strayed. But the struggle for
>    >control of ICANN's direction has only just begun.  The U.S. politicians
>    >need to be sensitive to the other 40 -odd governmental players (the GAC)
>    >too, not only to their six powerful Multinationals or their American
>    >constituents.
>    >
>    >We have to be watchful that handing the reins or the whip to U.S.
>    >politicians, is not going to end the global character of ICANN or lead
> us
>    >to even worse strife than we are now.
>    >After all, as much respect as we all have for the U.S. Constitution, we
>    >know that democracy in the real world is about the rule of money as much
> as
>    >it is here and now in ICANN.
>    >
>    >But I much appreciate your thoughtful posting, even if it does give me
> that
>    >slightly hopeless feeling.
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >
>    >--Joop--
>    >Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
>    >Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
>    >Developer of    The Polling Booth
>    >www.democracy.org.nz/vote1/
>    >
>    >
>    >--
>    >This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
>    >Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>    >("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
>    >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>    >
>    >
> 
> 
__________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html