[discuss] Current drive

Thu Apr 3 21:39:28 UTC 2014

Dear Fouad

> Accountability to a community within ICANN and to a

global community are two different issues.
>

ICANN's Accountability and Transparency commitments and its ongoing
efforts to improve that by the ATRT process is not directed towards
Accountability to the ICANN community but to the Global Stakeholders.
 There have been two ATRT exercises so far, and there is a tremendous
promise to further improve the review exercise, bring up improvements, in a
manner more visible to the Global Community that ICANN strives towards
greater standards of Accountability and Transparency. It will happen.

Sivasubramanian M

> 
>
>

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:

> One thing that concerns me is that can ICANN perform both the roles
> effectively for RZM planning and management and then the IANA function
> planning and management and how will a governance, accountability and
> transparency model be developed to ensure that ICANN is at least
> accountable. Accountability to a community within ICANN and to a
> global community are two different issues. ICANN does find some path
> towards this within its infant ms model of 15 years for being
> accountable and being transparent is a whole different effort and we
> somewhat have a feeling of how true is that.
>
> So far, I've seen discussions within 1net, ICANN and ISOC trying to
> cope with the understanding of stewardship.
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This part of what Wolfgang wrote is very well said:
> >
> >> ICANN has recognized that it does not live isolated but is part of a
> >> broader Internet Governance Ecosystem. If ICANN want
> >> s
> >> to continue to manage its core business correctly, it has also to invest
> >> into an environment which allows to do this.
> >
> >
> > If this is agreed, then we also need to agree that such an effort
> requires
> > resources, though I wouldn't brand the flow of revenues as "taxes" or
> > "rent". If ICANN acknowledges its broader role and starts "investing" in
> > broader causes of Global Public interest of importance to the Internet,
> then
> > Michael Gurstein's "other points" are automatically answered.
> >
> > I would consider the multi-stakeholder model of ICANN as a model barely
> 15
> > years old, so in its crawling stage of infancy (Compare it with Democracy
> > which is over 2000 years old :) ) For a model of Governance that is
> barely
> > 15 years old, ICANN has done exceedingly well. If we could acknowledge it
> > this way, then it becomes easier to contribute to make the ICANN
> governance
> > better in areas where improvements are needed.
> >
> > Sivasubramanian M
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:33 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> But a couple of other points:
> >> 1.       ICANN's privileged position in the Internet gives it the
> >> opportunity to obtain significant revenues from the Internet--some have
> >> described this as "rent" others as a "tax" on the Internet and/or
> Internet
> >> users.
> >> 2.       Given the nature of ICANN's role and history these funds I
> would
> >> argue are in a sense funds collected on behalf of the entire Internet
> >> community which I, at least, would define as everyone since everyone in
> the
> >> world is now in one way or another impacted by the Internet, with
> increasing
> >> numbers more directly involved in contributing either directly or
> indirectly
> >> to the content and operation of the Internet. (If these funds are not
> >> collected on behalf of the global internet community who in fact are
> they
> >> being collected for and by what authority?)
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >>
> >> Michael -
> >>
> >>    If ICANN is collecting more than is necessary for fulfilling its
> >> mission regarding
> >>    coordination and stability of Internet identifier system (including
> >> appropriate and
> >>    conservative reserve development given such its very important
> >> mission), then
> >>    that should be fixed; it represents a simple governance challenge
> with
> >> respect
> >>    to those paying for the services and the overall cost of delivery.
> >>
> >>    Repainting the funds as a "tax" in the public trust, and then
> >> establishing a regime
> >>    for management of them would change the nature of ICANN, effectively
> >> creating
> >>    "taxation" powers that  would normally be reserved for governments,
> and
> >> completely
> >>    without need, purely resulting from the avoidance of addressing what
> >> should be
> >>    a simple issue.
> >>
> >>    There are associations which coordinate systems such as credit card
> >> numbers and
> >>    bar codes, and charge the organizations who use those systems, with
> the
> >> resulting
> >>    imputed costs passed along as a nominal component of what is seen by
> >> the public.
> >>    I'd prefer that none of these organizations starting pretending to be
> >> governmental
> >>    taxation authorities by collecting more than they need for their
> narrow
> >> mission; the
> >>    same logic applies to ICANN in its mission of coordination of the
> >> Internet identifier
> >>    spaces.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >> /John
> >>
> >> Disclaimer:  My views alone.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> discuss mailing list
> >> discuss at 1net.org
> >> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> > India +91 99524 03099
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> --
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
> My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
> Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
>

-- 
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
India +91 99524 03099
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140404/0bcdd1dd/attachment.html>