<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">
<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">This part of what Wolfgang wrote is very well said:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">
<br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_default" style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;display:inline">
</div><font face="arial, sans-serif">ICANN has recognized that it does not live isolated but is part of a broader Internet Governance Ecosystem. If ICANN want<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51);display:inline">
s</div> to continue to manage its core business correctly, it has also to invest into an environment which allows to do this.</font></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">
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. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">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.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Sivasubramanian M</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:30 AM, John Curran <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jcurran@istaff.org" target="_blank">jcurran@istaff.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div class="">On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:33 PM, michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:13px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></div><div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">But a couple of other points:<u></u><u></u></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>1.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:'Times New Roman'"> <span> </span></span></span>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.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>2.<span style="font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:'Times New Roman'"> <span> </span></span></span>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?)<u></u><u></u></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite">...</blockquote><div><br></div>Michael - </div><div> </div><div> If ICANN is collecting more than is necessary for fulfilling its mission regarding</div><div> coordination and stability of Internet identifier system (including appropriate and</div>
<div> conservative reserve development given such its very important mission), then</div><div> that should be fixed; it represents a simple governance challenge with respect </div><div> to those paying for the services and the overall cost of delivery.</div>
<div><br></div><div> Repainting the funds as a "tax" in the public trust, and then establishing a regime </div><div> for management of them would change the nature of ICANN, effectively creating</div><div> "taxation" powers that would normally be reserved for governments, and completely</div>
<div> without need, purely resulting from the avoidance of addressing what should be</div><div> a simple issue.</div><div><br></div><div> There are associations which coordinate systems such as credit card numbers and</div>
<div> bar codes, and charge the organizations who use those systems, with the resulting </div><div> imputed costs passed along as a nominal component of what is seen by the public.</div><div> I'd prefer that none of these organizations starting pretending to be governmental</div>
<div> taxation authorities by collecting more than they need for their narrow mission; the </div><div> same logic applies to ICANN in its mission of coordination of the Internet identifier</div><div> spaces.</div><div>
<br></div><div>Thanks!</div><div>/John</div><div><br></div><div>Disclaimer: My views alone.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
India +91 99524 03099
</div>