[discuss] [governance] [bestbits] Fwd: Heads up on Brazil meeting preparation

françoise f.massit at orange.fr
Wed Jan 8 18:28:05 UTC 2014


Le 8 janv. 14 à 16:15, Louis Pouzin (well) a écrit :

> Superb, and true.
> Louis
> - - -
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global  
> Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
> Indeed, indeed, Parminder!
> The 1net idea was brought to a I-stars meeting after the NSA scandal  
> and the 'trust' crisis/issue over the current asymmetric domination.  
> 1net is an ICANN idea and since then has been pushed by ICANN. It is  
> amusing to note that thanks to the Montevideo statement, the  
> existence of these meetings has now become a public information - a  
> very-behind-close-doors-meetings!! The I-stars meetings were not  
> publicized before the NSA scandal pressures the I-stars. "We didn't  
> want to attract attention!! apologized the 11 CEOs part of the I- 
> stars, all them putting their signature at the bottom line of the  
> Montevideo statement ( in reaction to the crisis!). They survived  
> WCIT but not Snowden.
> Lynn Saint Amour, ISOC CEO in 2013, admitted in a recorded meeting  
> during last ICANN 48 that she and other I-stars CEOs were first  
> reluctant to the 1net idea. Would 1net be a competitor to ISOC and  
> its chapters if you only think of ISOC's view of 1net? Other reasons  
> were discussed.
> It is crystal clear to any political advisor with some experience  
> that 1net is a political extravaganza set to bring some sort of  
> legitimacy to ICANN and its plan to bake an international dressing  
> and menu, in order to keep as much as possible the asymmetry  
> acceptable. It is also a bright move to try to bring back as many  
> civil society voices under a I-stars overview/control. But some  
> elements of the international civil society are not governable from  
> the US, (when they exist and wherever they are located). 1net has  
> also a dilution effect over the IGF, which is still a UN 'thing'.  
> 1net would take away from the IGF some of its relevance - even  
> though one can admit that the IGF was stalling. The bestbit, the  
> 1net, the High Level Panel by the ICANN... all of that converge to  
> take the IGF down to a not-able venue - We the French have made a  
> word with the not-able, les notables, the ones having the impression  
> that they are the important guys around. No one better than a  
> notable can keep a status quo safe. Notables are usually  
> conservatives (of their status and advantages) by nature. A little  
> bit like the I-stars and their aficionados.
> ISOC could have been the natural 1net but is too much of a US  
> entity, even though it has offices around the world. The 1net idea  
> is to shift civil society and other Internet actors under an ICANN  
> umbrella, an umbrella being revamped as some sort of International  
> organization (IO). Even though it would be a fake IO, this new ICANN  
> would be an embarrassment to any initiative coming from or endorsed  
> by a multilateral, or international law related, oriented body.
> The I-stars are defending themselves from trying to lower the IGF  
> capacity. They have recently stated that, indeed, IGF deserves more  
> funds, and that the I-stars should think about  giving to the IGF.  
> This UN-WSIS venue is today functioning with a miserable budget,  
> even in comparison to the ICANN communication budget, or the ISOC  
> large revenues thank to PIR and its selling of domains  
> with .net, .org.... With such a poor financial condition, the IGF  
> has to turn to sometime evil government willing to show some good  
> face on the occasion by hosting the IGF meeting. Azerbaijan and  
> others have been financially correct and grata. After all, isn't it  
> fair to associate the UN with rogue states looking for friends. And  
> make sure that everyone confuses the UN with them.
> Nothing could be more effective than providing notables with some  
> more $ as they enjoy could table, and days of peace in remote  
> location whether in California, Bali or Argentina to meet, discuss  
> and blunder. We all remember that a few notables agreed to be paid  
> for their personal views over IG when attending the London High  
> level panel meeting set by the ICANN few weeks ago. What was the  
> budget on this one? 50 guests... Maybe the IGF would be happy to get  
> this money to investigate more about the financial practice over  
> inter-connected networks and data carriers, providers and miners. Or  
> launch an honest survey of ideas to improve IG practice.
> So, will the ICANN-1net plan work out? Will it be said: "Tout va  
> bien madame la marquise"?
> It is not hard to imagine that this will bring legitimate reactions  
> from many 'stakeholders'. Outside of 1net. Outside of ICANN et al.
> Brazil might already have lost its 'time'. Brazil and others.
> Enough will soon be enough
> JC
> __________________________
> Jean-Christophe Nothias
> jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net
> @jc_nothias
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

Françoise Massit-Folléa
f.massit at orange.fr
Mob. 06 74 51 67 65

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140108/f006ee9b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list