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

[michael gurstein]

Thanks for you clarity on this John


 

Inline


 

From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 4:24 PM
To: michael gurstein
Cc: 1Net List
Subject: Re: [discuss] Transparency and Accountability vis-à-vis ICANN and
the IANA functions

 

On Apr 3, 2014, at 6:43 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:





John,

 

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?

 

Michael - 

 

   I saw the paragraph, and answered it:  the technical coordination of
Internet identifier 

   predominantly serves the providers of the infrastructure of the Internet
itself, i.e. private 

   interests.

[MG>] yes


 

   That does not mean that the Internet itself cannot be focused on serving
public interests,

   or have a set of principles oriented towards that purpose, but simply
that a set of principles 

   for that purpose are above the infrastructure,... i.e. a  set of
principles for Internet _governance_, 

   whereas ICANN and the related registries are predominantly about
technical administration,

   and need a set of principles focused on open and transparent
administration of the registries.

 

[MG>] So, in an Internet ecology where ICANN is a central player and where
they have  very considerable funds (and an active interest) to animate and
influence that ecology the central “principle” is that of supporting and
enabling “private interests”.  

 

That being the case perhaps you could tell us, given the current
configuration of activities and the evidently single minded push from the
USG and the leadership of ICANN to be the core framework for Internet
Governance, where exactly will the initiatives come from to ensure that “the
Internet
 can.. be focused on public interests” or develop a “set of
principles oriented towards that purpose”
 especially since ICANN has worked
so assiduously to ensure that Civil Society (and the technical community) is
aligned with its activities and directions (and values?).

 

I’m wondering if an ”Internet for the private good” (i.e. for the benefit of
the Comcasts of the world and their owners—the 1%)  is consistent with the
desires and expectations of the rest of the world outside of the rarified
atmosphere of ICANN’s 5 star hotels and the USG and their allies and that in
fact most (and including their countries) would very much opt for an
Internet for the Common Good
 

 

M 

 

 

FYI,

/John

 

Disclaimer: My view alone.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140403/ba107c79/attachment.html>