[atlarge-discuss] RE: [atlarge-panel] RE: [atlarge-discuss] Challenge from Ross Rader

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

More like this please.
Brilliant response Judith.
Thank you.
Joanna

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judith Oppenheimer [mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 10:01 PM
> To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de; ross@byte.org; Panel (E-mail)
> Subject: [atlarge-panel] RE: [atlarge-discuss] Challenge from Ross Rader
>
>
> Re "individual participation" in ICANN - So many reasons, so little time,
> so here are just a few (courtesy of ICB Toll Free News archives):
>
>
> Because "A major implication of the Internet model is that value is not
> created in the network, but at the edges, by users."
> Timothy Denton, with François Ménard and David Isenberg, Netheads Versus
> Bellheads:  Research into Emerging Policy Issues in the Development and
> Deployment of Internet Protocols
>
>
> Because "control of the root is being leveraged to control the Internet
> itself in such key areas as trademark and copyright protection,
> surveillance of users, content regulation, and regulation of the domain
> name supply industry."
> Milton Mueller, Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of
> Cyberspace
>
>
> Because "ICANN has the potential to turn into the first world regulatory
> body. By beginning to associate top level domains with content usage, they
> are putting themselves into the position of being the defacto arbiter of
> content. This is in addition to what territory that they can grab in the
> intellectual property world along with WIPO. If all else fails, they can
> always play games with protocol standards and IP address allocation. I
> suspect that most people have no clue what this issue is all about, nor
> care. Remember that Mussolini started with the trains....  There's an old
> adage about only giving power to those who don't want it.... If
> we're going
> to have a world government, then I want a revolution first.
> Preferably with
> some historic event like throwing all the T-1s into Boston harbor. These
> people are enacting policy, cutting deals with large technology companies
> and signing things that look suspiciously like treaties with governments
> and quasi government groups (some of dubious legitimacy).... I went to
> school with one of the students killed at Kent State, worked for an
> military/intelligence agency in my youth and watched as the last
> administration passed wind while leaving the white house. I never felt
> paranoia before. I do now."
> David Holtzman, Chairman and CEO of Opion Inc. and former Chief Technology
> Officer at Network Solutions, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WORLD
> GOVT, I WANT A
> REVOLUTION FIRST.
>
>
> Because "icann is more interested in, and totally focused on, arranging
> power rather than providing simple stewardship and service. icann is
> brilliant at rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. the problem is
> they have the internet on board."
> Randy Bush (characterized, for those who don't know him, by Dave
> Farber, as
> "brutally rational.")
>
>
> Because "The board of ICANN shouldn´t consist of people with direct
> commercial interests such as registrar/registry function. ICANN
> needs to be
> able to make decisions in the interest of the internet users and
> the global
> information space, the internet. There needs to be a balance between
> commercial and public use of this infrastructure and the board
> must consist
> of people who think about the impact of the decisions for the
> communication
> culture and space, not only on their own business."
> Andy Mueller-Maguhn, elected ICANN Director
>
>
> Because "We're not so stupid that we don't see what ICANN is doing, which
> is establishing absolute power, free from any of the checks and
> balances of
> government."
> Brian Livingston, Contributing Editor of InfoWorld and CNET News.com
>
>
> Because "The UDRP walks and quacks like law. It sets out a rule for
> deciding between competing claims to possession of particular
> resources. It
> sets up a process to apply that rule on a case-by-case basis. And it is
> binding upon those in possession of the resource in question; in the event
> of an adverse ruling, the domain name holder will relinquish possession of
> the contested domain name."
> David G. Post, Associate Professor of Law at Temple University Law School,
> and Co-Founder and Co-Director of the Cyberspace Law Institute.
>
>
> Because "Someday we may look back and realize that this moment
> was critical
> in deciding who got to control this new form of global communication."
> Steven Hill, western regional director of the Center for Voting and
> Democracy
>
>
> Because "In my research of Internet policy over the years, I've had the
> pleasure of reading numerous court orders, FCC notices, and other official
> government documents. These works are impressive historic documents that
> exhaustively consider every point raised by all sides, bring in the
> background that applies to each point, and carefully lay out the reasoning
> that leads to a final decision. Nothing like this appears in ICANN public
> documents. They are terse bulletins that list decisions made and brief
> technical justifications.... Many non-profit organizations let
> members vote
> on by-law changes, examine accounting books, and so forth. If
> ICANN members
> were allowed to elect its Board, they'd have the same rights.
> Andy Oram, an editor at O'Reilly & Associates
>
>
> Because “ICANN is establishing Internet policy ... It becomes problematic
> if it makes policy judgments without adequate policy processes.”
> Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass
>
>
> Because "The most critical public policy issue affecting the Internet
> remains the same - namely, its governance... ICANN’s legal authority for
> “technical management of the Internet” (in ICANN’s own words) remains in
> doubt. A connected issue is ICANN’s ability to finance its operations."
> David W. Maher, Vice President - Public Policy, ISOC
>
>
> Because ""When ICANN was in serious trouble in 1998 and 1999,
> they promised
> open elections for all... The Internet Community relied on their word. But
> once Congress and Commerce seemed satisfied and NSI was brought into the
> fold, ICANN began a full reversal of their original stance."
> Mikki Barry, President of the Domain Name Rights Coalition
>
>
> Because, Ross, "The essence of ICANN’s problem is the disproportionate
> attention which is being given inside the working groups, and,
> increasingly
> outside, in private conferences, to the pretensions of the IP
> community ...
> on grounds that we and our Internet users consider to be dubious and, in
> some cases, in outright error ... as to policy as regards the future
> direction of the Internet... What we are actually observing in the saga of
> domain name expansion is a power-grab of major proportions over the
> architecture of the Internet, using ICANN not so much as a representative
> forum for IP interests as the embodimenet of IP lawyers’ interests.
>  ... that we are in fact acceding to a takeover of the political processes
> of ICANN by a set of interests that oppose what the Internet stands for."
> Ross Wm. Rader, Tucows
>
>
> Because "... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just
> Powers from the Consent of the Governed"
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> ----------
> Judith Oppenheimer
> http://JudithOppenheimer.com
> http://ICBTollFreeNews.com
> http://WhoSells800.com
> 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> ----------
> Visit 1-800 AFTA, http://www.1800afta.org
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> ----------
>
> >
> > > >From Ross Rader's byte.org blog:
> > >
> > > "I asked the question a week ago, but still don't "get" the
> > answers. A few
> > > people included me in a thread going on over on the
> > at-large discussion list
> > > regarding what the arguments for and against individual
> > participation in
> > > ICANN actually are. The answers coming back weren't all
> > that convincing - all
> > > I managed to take away was that users are entitled to a
> > seat because they use
> > > the system. Not terribly convincing. Convince me."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 127k members/stakeholders strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> > Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 972-244-3801
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-panel-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-panel-help@lists.fitug.de
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de