An Argument for Proposal #1 (was Re: [ga] NC BS)

["John Palmer" <jp@adns.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: "Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>
Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:20 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] NC BS


> But non-voting membership is of course very second class, often to the
> point of meaninglessness; this will be even more true in the reformed
> ICANN, in which all the participants in the various advisory sops will
> quickly learn this lesson.
>
> An ICANN that fails to either limit its mission so that voting isn't
> important, or that fails to honor the commitment to 50% control by
> an at-large made up predominantly of end-users, is going to be an
incumbent
> and insider protection society.  Unattractive.  Irresponsible.  Unstable.
> In fact, doomed.
>

Precisely. The insiders are there for one reason - to maintain their
monopoly
control over the USG root. Their goal is to shut out competition so that
they
can have all of the business. Without a higher authority forcibly removing
them,
no meaningful reform can take place.

Thats why any plan from the inside is suspect, even if it sound like it
could be
reform. In this case (the Lynn proposal), not only doesn't is sound nice,
but
it arrogantly states that there will be no at-large representation.

This is the reason that proposal number two on the vote that is in progress
is
unacceptable. Asking them to "please be nice" will not work, since it means
giving up their control of the board to at-large.  This will mean, most
likely
more competition for the currently registries (Verisign, Afilias, Neulevel,
Neustar) and a serious analysis of the UDRP, which if it is honestly done,
can only lead to the conclusion that the correct thing to do is for all
registrants being released from the binding nature of UDRP and allowing
for voluntary use of it only.

It is now to the point where a higher authority has to force the board to
let go - they wont do it on their own because it means giving up their
monopoly. They need to be forced to do it. All of the plans that they
have for reform go exactly in the wrong direction. Therefore, the only
solution is to re-bid the contract and take it from them. Maybe, with
historical hindsight, we can start over and avoid the mistakes of the past.
There is no guarantee that what will come in the future will be utopia, but
one thing we can say for sure is that what is presently in place is
unworkable when it comes to the good of the whole community and that
any reform that is led by the insiders will fail to address the real needs
of busting the root-level monopoly because the insiders have zero
incentive to change and every reason to continue as they are.

Proposal #2 on the ballot is milk toast. It asks for them to be nice. Vote
against it and vote for Proposal #1 which has the teeth. We have tried
asking them to be nice now for over 4 years and have been met with
policies that become more closed and cliquish every day. ICANN
must be removed and we must start fresh.

Please vote YES on Proposal #1 and NO on Proposal #2.

John

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html