Re: [ga-icann] On being technology or consumer driven

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Great Post William and I think you summed it up nicely. ICANN can't do the things we suggest and something has to be created not in place of ICANN but in addition to ICANN with a totally different purpose. The GA COULD be that. The DNSO COULD be redefined as another. There may be a need for more than one. They may even still be SOs in a way to ICANN that address consumer issues. So the questions are do we form something outside of ICANN? and if so how will it deal with ICANN on these issues. Do we form something within ICANN that is a Constituency, an SO, or something else entirely?

 

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----

From: William S. Lovell

To: ga-icann

Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 12:41 PM

Subject: [ga-icann] On being technology or consumer driven

Great cartoon in the Parade (a U.S. Sunday Supplement pub) magazine today.
Two little kids are staring at a refrigerator with various drawings on the door,
and down below it says (to the effect -- I don't have it in front of me), "Sure
wish we had the money so we could really communicate things." I have used
Veronica and the grandchildren's refrigerator art as issues in Federal Court
with some modicum of success (my client got his domain name back). In
ICANN, whether in the GA or anywhere else, people with those concerns
have no voice whatever.  And here is what I think is the reason:

Many of the high tech business involved folks here will recognize the distinction
between the technology and the consumer driven company.  The former is the
birthplace of vapor ware, the whizzy computer named after the girl friend that
out in the market drops a terrible bomb, the electronic wizard who comes up
with the ultra technology, forms a company, and then the company heads for the
bottom of the pile until the Board replaces the inventor-techie CEO with
someone who knows how to run a business, and so on. The automobile
industry exemplifies the latter -- whatever the consumer wants.  The whole
business plan is run on marketing surveys, and good and progressive new
technology that would really benefit the consumer if used never sees the
market place because the consumer has not actually asked for any of it.

So what it boils down to is that the public I'm talking about wants a consumer
driven internet, while ICANN is technology driven.  It does not, and likely
never will, understand the function of a public interest organization with respect
to the needs of the little guy. It performs an extremely essential service in what
it does with regard to roots, cc TLDs, etc., but those are not the things that the
little guy knows or cares about. The effect is that, whether or not with malice
aforethought, ICANN has become a service organization to NSI/Verisign and
the general public has been murdered. (Someone with more time than I have
should run a comparison between what the Articles of Incorporation say that
ICANN should be doing and the "research contract" that NSI/Verisign is now
touting to see how they match up.)

So my conclusion is that I will battle with every bone I have to ensure the
continued functioning and good fortune of ICANN -- what it does could
not be done by any other kind of organization. The quibble I have is that
is should stop pretending to be something that it is not.

At the same time, I think that ICANN cannot do the things that we've
been talking about lately that in fact are oriented towards the "consumer,"
and will never be able to, hence something else is needed.  Marilyn Cade
and others are discussing such needs, and something may come of that
yet.  "Live in hope and die in dispair," they say, but I don't think so.

Bill Lovell