Re: [ga] Essay on ICANN

[Michael Sondow <msondow@iciiu.org>]

Dennis wrote (to Michael Froomkin):
> 
> I heard Esther Dyson and Mike Roberts today take an oath before proclaiming that ICANN was an
> open, inclusive organization committed to avoiding disparate treatment for any group.

"Consensus" is the key word, thrown in at every opportunity as a
smokescreen and shield against any interrogation of the board's true
activities.

> I am not saying
> they are incapable of having a change of heart, but how would I know that?  They would be swearing
> to the same things they've always sworn to.

Precisely. And without the chance to cross-examine and present
witnesses and testimony that contradicts their assertions, they
cannot be disproved. That is why it has become necessary, quite
necessary, to take ICANN to court.

> In addition, you make the magnanimous statement that no one says that ICANN is corrupt.  That
> statement is premature at best.   The ICANN board endorsed the WIPO draft before sending it to the
> DNSO.   That was the act of a captured organization, under the complete control of an interest group.

There is other evidence of capture. Michael Roberts and Joe Sims
were present on the June 10th NCDNHC teleconference, during which
legitimate representatives of DNSO constituencies were disconnected
from the conference on the say-so of an unelected, temporary NC
chair, and neither said a word in protest. Sox of the seven
constituencies of the DNSO are in the hands of CORE or its allies.
There are five (or more) CORE officers on the NC, when the ICANN
bylaws prohibit more than one officer of an organization at a time.
The Non-Commercial constituency has been run from its inception
through the listserv and website of one of the organizations - ISOC
- vying for control of it, a clear breach of due process tantamount
to fraud, and this has been condoned and abetted by the ICANN board.
The DNSO and its NC held official meetings under the aegis of ISOC,
a special-interest group within ICANN. Two members of the nine
members of the ICANN board are members of ISOC, and four of them are
members of the IAHC, a coalition of special interests formed prior
to the creation of ICANN. And there are more, many more, evidences
of capture of ICANN.

> The ICANN staff includes some brilliant young lawyers.  For ICANN to > have failed this long and this consistently to see that it needed to > scrutinize all its actions to ensure that it wasn't becoming a state
> actor violating individuals' civil liberties is an act at best of > hysterical  blindness, at worst, of plain old corruption.

"Corruption" implies payment for services, although there are other
motives for it. Rather than simple corruption, the U.S. antitrust
laws - the Sherman Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act -
envisage "conspiracy" as a mechanism for capture. Conspiracy would
be the collusion of persons and organizations for the purpose of
controlling an organization that regulates commerce, in order to
benefit those persons and organizations. 

> I like your quest for a solution -- but this isn't it.

At yesterday's Commerce Committee hearing, which I attended,
Jonathan Weinberg, one of the witnesses and an associate of Michael
Froomkin, defended and apologized for ICANN. Michael Froomkin and
Jonathan Weinberg have consistently defended the existence of ICANN
on these lists, and have gone out of their way to denigrate and
demolish any and all arguments for the prosecution of the board and
exposure of its capture by special interests. In effect, Froomkin
and Weinberg are apologists for ICANN. Their goal is to preserve it.

============================================================
Michael Sondow           I.C.I.I.U.     http://www.iciiu.org
Tel. (212)846-7482                        Fax: (603)754-8927
============================================================