ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[ga] Internet Users


Just a few snippets from the ICANN MoU with the DoC.  I did not think to suggest to the ALSC that they read this document.  The vast majority of Internet Users are not holders of Domain Names and have just been arbitrarily and unjustifiably injured via exclusion in elections and policy matters

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/icann-memorandum.htm
 

2. Neither Party, either in the DNS Project or in any act related to the DNS Project, shall act unjustifiably or arbitrarily to injure particular persons or entities or particular categories of persons or entities.

3. Private, Bottom-Up Coordination

This Agreement is intended to result in the design, development, and testing of a private coordinating process that is flexible and able to move rapidly enough to meet the changing needs of the Internet and of Internet users. This Agreement is intended to foster the development of a private sector management system that, as far as possible, reflects a system of bottom-up management.

4. Representation.

This Agreement promotes the technical management of the DNS in a manner that reflects the global and functional diversity of Internet users and their needs. This Agreement is intended to promote the design, development, and testing of mechanisms to solicit public input, both domestic and international, into a private-sector decision making process. These mechanisms will promote the flexibility needed to adapt to changes in the composition of the Internet user community and their needs.
__________
The Study Draft is long but out of the executive summary we find these points that address my concern of defining and excluding Internet Users

    Nor do we believe that users' interests can be properly represented through a system that relies on e-mail addresses to identify individuals; such an approach is administratively and financially unworkable on a global scale for a sizeable electorate, and fraught with potential dangers ranging from capture to outright fraud. Furthermore, experience has already shown that it is costly and difficult to manage and does not effectively handle many people in regions that use non-Latin script or have inefficient postal systems.

       Instead, we have found the requirement that members hold a domain name to be a useful way of identifying individuals, reaching them (initially) in a decentralized way through registrars and ensuring their direct interest in the Internet infrastructure that is ICANN's central concern. (Any e-mail address holder can acquire a domain name at minimal cost, but with some effort. To help ensure that this is not an impediment to those who want a domain name and want to be an At-Large member, the ALSC suggests that the ICANN community identify and encourage organizations that could provide appropriate assistance to such users.)

       We believe the approach with the best chance for consensus support is addressing Internet users' interests by organizing ICANN along stakeholder interest or functional lines of developers, providers and users, by defining At-Large members as "individual domain name holders" (since they have a strong and tangible vested interest in ICANN activities, not just the Internet in general),
_______

Almost identical logic was used to prevent freed slaves(verification of ID) from voting, women from voting (only the husband who supporter her had a vested interest) and non-property owners (if you did not pay property tax you had no right to be involved).  But not to worry we can buy the right to participate at a "nominal cost" paid to a registrar.

Sorry for the length but if this comes to fruition against the dotcommoner then you will not have to read my dribble anymore.

Sincerely,
Eric



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>