Re: [wg-review] Bill of Particulars

["Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>]

Point number 2 should be phrased differently. the problem is not that individual constituencies are "unrepresentative," but that the constiteuncy *structure* has been gerrymandered to increase representation of some interests and reduce or eliminate representation of others.

There is an overwhelming amount of support and analysis behind that assertion. So much so, that I'm afraid to start typing it up, because I have a real job to do today and that isn't it.

Let's just see how Ken S. responds to these points about the unreprsentative structure:

1. The IP constituency represents a particular SUBSET of business/commercial interests, a subset that is based entirely on a particular policy position(protect IP and forget anything else). But there is no counterpart on the other side of the policy spectrum, e.g., a civil liberties/free expression constituency. Since TM rights are BY LAW bounded by free expression rights and do not in any country's legal system constitute an absolute right, such a structure is inherently biased in a particular policy direction.

2. ISPs, Registrars, and registries are all businesses. Why is there a separate B&C constituency?

3. ccTLDs, who are asked for 40%+ of ICANN's budget, receive 1/7 of the representation on the DNSO, which in turn receives 1/6 of the Board representation. 

4. CcTLDs are registries. What is the justification for making them a separate constituency? (There may be strong justifications, but I haven't seen it yet.)

5. Why was the gTLD constituency restricted to NSI, when there were, prior to ICANN's creation, other prospective and actual, functioning gTLD operators? Why are there no plans to include new, ICANN-designated gTLDs in that constituency? Why should gTLDs have to be in the ICANN root to be accepted in the constituency - shouldn't they, as prospective registries, have a stake in affecting ICANN policies? 

I could go on. Sorry, Ken, it's a one-finger exercise to reduce the rationale behind the DNSO constituency structure to absolute rubble. I look forward to your response.

--MM

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