RE: [wg-review] Intake from the GA ML

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Folks, whether one thinks that ICANN is too US controlled or influenced or
not, there are serious matters for the GA to think about in terms of what
alternatives exist in terms of governmental involvement.

Let me try to identify: what options are there?  

Well, there's increasing the role of the government players via the GAC, and
giving them more control.  So, we get into a "one country, one vote"
scenario.  Since not all counties even attend the GAC, should we slow things
down, while we wait for all the governments to show up?  Will that improve
the ability of ICANN to make decisions, or slow it down even further?
Ideas? I think on that front, maintaining the role of the GAC as advisory
seems to be working to everyone's satisfaction. 

What about the ITU?  The ITU is controlled by/responsible to individual
governments, with no input from individuals, and minimal from private
sector, and none from NGOs' that I am aware of. Check out what it costs to
be a sector member, as industry, and you'll soon get the sense that it isn't
cheap. 

And, then, there is the issue that the ITU is primarily responsible for, and
accountable for telecom issues, and fairly busy at that... Are they the
right forum to deal with Internet issues and are they able to move quickly
enough to deal with the issues facing ICANN.  

Or, maybe there's the WTO: well, they only do trade issues. And disputes...
not a useful forum for fast paced decision  making. And each individual
country has to first decide what the priorities are to bring a WTO case, so
it's not clear what would rise to the level of a WTO case in the areas which
ICANN now manages....

Is the goal to increase governmental involvement? 

I think that however flawed, or imperfect one might find ICANN, it is better
than the alternatives.  But, we should all be striving for improvements in
ICANN.   I know we all agree with that.

Marilyn



-----Original Message-----
From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:terastra@terabytz.co.nz]
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 8:52 PM
To: Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.; brianappleby@netscape.net; jo-uk@rcn.com
Cc: Babybows.com; wg-review@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-review] Intake from the GA ML


At 18:49 8/04/01 -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
>
>It might be a good idea to have one nation's legislature -- particularly
the
>U.S. Congress -- perform oversight of ICANN's current activities, but this
>may not be a prudent long term solution, and we should be cautious in
>considering the matter.

Very cautious. In Europe the members of the European parliament are
starting to take notice too. They are irritated about the delay for the .eu
TLD. 

Newspaper comments about the just held "WHo governs ICANN?" meeting there:

Nachdem der Giessener Politologe Claus Leggewie das Experiment der ersten
globalen Online-Wahlen zum Aufsichtsrat der ICANN für gescheitert erklärt
hatte, hielt auch Detlef Eckert, Leiter der Grundsatzabteilung der
Generaldirektion Informationsgesellschaft der Europäischen Kommission, mit
seiner Kritik nicht hinterm Berg. Wer die ICANN als "wahrhaft
international" bezeichne, "liegt falsch", befand der Volkswirtschaflter Er
beklagte ein "nicht ausgewogenes" Kräfteverhältnis zwischen der
Europäischen Union und den USA im Bereich der ICANN. Auch für den
Rechtsanwalt Michael Schneider, der aus seinen Erfahrungen im Names Council
der ICANN berichtete, haben die USA die Strukturen der Netzverwaltung "voll
im Griff". So beschäftige die ICANN nur einen einzigen nicht-amerikanischen
Mitarbeiter. Außerdem übe der Justiziar des Unternehmens - natürlich ein
US-Amerikaner - "mehr Einfluss aus, als er eigentlich haben sollte." 


Roughly translated:
Political scientist Clause Leggewie declared the experiment of the first
global ICANN elections "a failure".
Detlef Eckert (leader of the IT dept of the European Commission) said ICANN
is not "truly international" and complained that there is no balance of
power between the US and the EU in ICANN.
(this view  seems to ignore  the rest of the world --joop)
Michael Schneider said that the US has a 'full grip" on  the structures of
Net governance.
ICANN employs only a single non-US citizen and the in-house Lawyer (of
course from the US) have more influence than they should... 

of course Hans Kraijenbrink (who sits as lobbyist for the Dutch Telecom
firm KPN in Brussels, and for whom ICANN is the most transparent
Organization in the world) 
denied it all:  "I don't feel them breathing down my neck" and "what we
have learned is, that self-governance is possible"
  
Hans Kraaijenbrink, einer der am längsten amtierenden ICANN-Direktoren,
verwies die Berichte von der permanenten Bevormundung der ICANN durch die
US-Regierung dagegen ins Reich der Legenden. "Ich fühle nicht ständig einen
heißen Atem in meinem Nacken", sagte der Niederländer, der als Lobbyist für
die Telekommunikationsgesellschaft KPN in Brüssel sitzt. Auch die ständige
Kritik an dem Netzgremium konnte er nicht nachvollziehen. "Was wir gelernt
haben, ist, dass die Selbstverwaltung möglich ist", sagte Kraaijenbrink,
für den ICANN die "transparenteste Organisation auf der ganzen Welt ist".

source:http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-08.04.01-003/

--joop



--
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
--
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