[discuss] Transparency and Accountability vis-à-vis ICANN and the IANA functions

Shatan, Gregory S. GShatan at ReedSmith.com
Fri Apr 4 00:42:43 UTC 2014

This should not be an either/or question.

From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 6:44 PM
To: 'John Curran'
Cc: '1Net List'
Subject: Re: [discuss] Transparency and Accountability vis-à-vis ICANN and the IANA functions


You probably overlooked this paragraph

There is a third possible goal (which I would anticipate many in this discussion will suggest) which is “enabling the most effective (and/or efficient) operation of the Internet”.  However, on close examination I think it is clear that this is not (and cannot) be a discrete goal in itself, rather it simply awaits the raising of the same question… “enabling the most effective operation of the Internet” for what… --the public interest or the range of private interests?


From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 3:12 PM
To: michael gurstein
Cc: George Sadowsky; 1Net List
Subject: Re: [discuss] Transparency and Accountability vis-à-vis ICANN and the IANA functions

On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:55 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com<mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>> wrote:

John and all (and please take this as also my response to your comments re: "the Current Drive" discussion...

I take your points below concerning "principles"...

But from what I see these are principles concerning the processes which are being (or will be) undertaken concerning ICANN/IANA.

What I don't see there is anything about what the fundamental goals that these processes are directed towards or the outcome they are meant

Efficient operation of the Internet...  this is the purpose for the Internet protocols that
have been developed, and the accompanying registries serve the same purpose.

As I see it there are two possible and mutually exclusive goals that these processes might be pursuing:
1.       The “public interest” i.e. ensuring that the operation of these processes maximize benefits for the broadest range of those concerned with the Internet i.e. (in the current context) “everybody”/in Parminder’s phrase, the public

There are quite a few elements that might encompass "maximizing benefits (for everybody)";
this includes specific public policy norms that effect protocol or registry usage; various economic
incentives, taxation, and/or redistibutions, content controls versus freedom of speech and
various user and service provider mandates with regards to public policy norms, etc.

These are not the realm of the Internet registry operations, anymore than they are normally
part of the development of Internet protocols.   There may be interactions from time to time,
but you do not want significant public policy tradeoffs for purposes of governing the actiions
of others being made in predominantly technical forums.

BTW, I think going back to George’s original exhortation, this is the basic and most fundamental question concerning Internet Governance Principles which must be addressed in the context of the NetMundial.

That might easily be the case, but that is a set of principles for Internet _governance_, whereas
ICANN and the related registries are predominantly about technical administration and require
a set of principles that insure that Internet technical coordination is performed in a very visible
and transparent manner.  These are different problem spaces.


Disclaimer: My views alone.

* * *

This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation.

* * *

To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication  (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.

Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140404/1bdab05f/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list