Re: Structure and values (was Re: [ga] WLS Suggestion)

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

The problem with ICANN is simple. If it is to be the provider of Earths IP
services then that needs to be ratified by both the UN and each and every
country formally.

My take is that this is not likely to happen and as such that the NTIA may
have over stepped its bounds in awarding a sole contract for this service
based technology to ICANN. The reason that it is not today is because ICANN
does not run the Internet, the Telco's do.

Todd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@vitaminic.net>
To: "Patrick" <patrick@stealthgeeks.net>
Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 1:59 AM
Subject: Structure and values (was Re: [ga] WLS Suggestion)


> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002 07:17:58 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
> >It is a job best left to governments. While I can't say I'm particularly
happy
> >with my governments track record on that point as of late, at least I
have
> >some semblance of representation, and my governments pockets are deep
> >enough to engage in long, drawn-out suits involving monopolists.
>
> This perhaps is true in your country. Not in all countries - not even in
all
> Western countries (in fact, the Prime Minister of Italy is a
> quasi-monopolist in most media markets in the country - can you imagine
his
> government sueing monopolies?).
>
> So I still think we should question whether ICANN is the right
> non-governmental regulatory body and built in the right way, rather than
> suggesting that there should be an international governmental regulator
> rather than a non-governmental one.
>
> Said this, the recent decision on WLS seems to prove that the present
ICANN
> is unable to take into proper account the need to protect consumers and
> competition, even to the point of reversing the consensus in the
underlying
> constituency bodies; and also proves once again that ICANN's decisions
have
> a deep effect on the effectiveness and affordability of prices and
services
> in the DNS market for the registrants, and then, in cascade, for final
users
> (this for Ross Rader).
>
> I have been contributing to ICANN's Reform process (last, as a member of
the
> ALAC Advisory Group) because I think that we should avoid at any cost that
a
> governmental body replaces ICANN, and because I think that users like me,
> notwithstanding their good reasons, have to work to prove their ability to
> supply practical contributions to decision-making processes. But this last
> *policy* decision from the Board is very disappointing. If I had to prove
> why ICANN needs not just a structural reform, but a marked change of
> direction in terms of policy-making process and values, the WLS episode
> would be one of my top evidences.
> --
> vb.               [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
> --------> http://bertola.eu.org/ - Archivio FAQ e molto altro... <--------
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

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