[discuss] the three orthogonal questions [was Thoughts welcome on proposed Netmundial submission]

Tue Mar 4 11:50:16 UTC 2014

At 16:19 03/03/2014, Roland Perry wrote:
>In message <B962D591-9434-4DF7-BF2A-1EC933662191 at chambers.gen.nz>, 
>at 23:41:51 on Sun, 2 Mar 2014, Peter Dengate Thrush 
><barrister at chambers.gen.nz> writes
>>THE issue in play is that ICANN performs these functions under a 
>>contract from the USG
>
>But only because ICANN won the contract (each time so far). It 
>should not be taken for granted that they always will.

But only because the US thinks they are ligitimate in granting this contract.

There are therefore three totally orthogonal issues that therefore 
cannot be settled by a common agreement because there is no common 
law to protect it:

1. for the US citizens only: why do you think this contract legitimate?

2. for the non-US citizens who use the service organized by that 
US/ICANN contract: why do you use it and not the equivalent by your contract.

3. for all those who use these services: what should the NTIA and 
ICANN do in order to enhance the quality of this services?

A 4th subsidiary question is, how each response is favored or not by 
the completion of the Vint Cerf internet project that is obscured by 
the "status-quo" mentality, and enlighten for common lay people by 
the basic "virtual networks of the networks of networks" formulation 
of the internetting purpose (actually denying Vint Cerf his most 
fundamental contribution).

M G