<html>
<body>
1. On the US face: <br><br>
<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/03/gop_blasts_decision_to_cut_ties_with_icann.html" eudora="autourl">
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/03/gop_blasts_decision_to_cut_ties_with_icann.html<br>
</a>No comment needed .... Will Obamanet be a new
Obamacare?<br><br>
<br>
2. On the EU face:<br><br>
At 08:19 16/03/2014, Andrea Glorioso wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Until now the United States has
had the final say in changes to globally used data on top-level Internet
domain names, such as .com or .de. The Commission has been pushing
for such a move since 2009 and, most recently in its Communication on
Internet Policy and Governance of 12 February 2014, called for the
globalisation of the IANA functions. </blockquote><br>
Nelly (or the one who has her signature) has not yet understood the DNS
:-) <br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">"The European Commission
will work together with the US and with all global stakeholders to
implement the globalisation of the IANA functions in a process that is
accountable and transparent, and in a manner that secures the open
Internet and that will underpin human rights."</blockquote><br>
Nelly for sure has not read the NTIA statement: "NTIA will not
accept a proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or an
inter-governmental organization solution". An EC+EU work would mean
a government-led solution.<br><br>
<br>
3. On the Multitude face:<br><br>
However, we could forgive Nelly and her associates if they clarify what
they mean by "global stakeholders" as it can be:<br><br>
- either a synonym for "incumbents and TNC"s, as expressed by
the NTIA when stating they are "committed to a transition that will
allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management",
deliberately excluding the Civil Society from their project.<br><br>
- or a clear designation of all the multitude of VGN managers.<br><br>
jfc<br>
</body>
</html>