[ga] NC BS
Jamie Love raises a key question about defining
stakeholders.
And Jonathan Weinberg has provided a good insight into the
divisive nature of individual involvement.
Let me propose a few starting points.
1. "Stakeholders in ICANN policy development" means those
directly impacted by ICANN policies.
2. Stakeholders in the Internet per se are a different
group.
3. The impact of ICANN policy on e.g. Verisign, is of a
different order to the impact of ICANN policy on my non-PC owning Aunt
Agatha.
Conclusion:
- there need to be different levels of involvement in ICANN
policy development.
If you accept the above conclusion, lets review 1) by
reference to the existing DNSO constituencies:
gTLD registries, ccTLD registries, registrars, ISPs -
ICANN policies impact on their business contracts. They are
stakeholders.
Business, Intellectual property interests, non-commercial
organisation users - ICANN policies impact on the confidence of themselves and
their customers/members to use the internet for e-commerce or non-commercial
purpose (UDRP, Who Is, domain name availability, security, stability). They are
stakeholders.
Individual registrants - like all consumers - may
be indirectly impacted by ICANN policies. Is each individual a true stakeholder
in the same sense ? I do not know but their collective interests are
clearly valid. In the non-ICANN world the voice of consumers in policy
development is typically heard via consumer organisations. Such
organisations exist at national and regional (eg EU) level. This is the format
of involvement of registrants as consumers that the NC envisages in
recommendation 19.
The rest of the world including my Aunt Agatha who choose not
to seek involvement in one of these intermediary groups of stakeholders, should
be offered the opportunity of consultation.
Philip
|