[ICANN-EU] More on Distinctions Between Candidates

["Christopher Chiu" <cchiu@aclu.org>]

Jeff--for further information, you may also want to check the Internet
Democracy Project website under
http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/answers.htm

The Project has collected answers to its own Internet governance
questionnaire (which is based on the Yokohama Civil Society statement). I
have included a sample answer (from Alan Levin, an Africa candidate) below.

Hope this helps!

Sincerely,
Christopher Chiu
Global Internet Liberty Campaign Organizer
American Civil Liberties Union

--------------------------------------------
> Questions for ICANN Board candidates
> Created by the Internet Democracy Project.

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Issue #1: Free Speech and Intellectual Property
> 1. The Civil Society Statement argues that the Uniform Domain Name Dispute
> Resolution Policy (UDRP) does not sufficiently protect free speech and was
> put together in an undemocratic manner.
>
> -Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not?

Yes, this is a controversial issue that has not satisfied its purpose.
There is still much work to be done and more resources required.

> -The Statement proposes that following the At Large elections, the UDRP
> should be evaluated and put up for a vote of reauthorization. Would you
> support such a move?

Yes.

> Issue #2: new Top Level Domains
> 2. The Civil Society Statement provides that ICANN's highest priority be
to
> expand the domain name space through the creation of new TLD (Top Level
> Domain) registries.
>
> -Do you believe that expansion of the Internet domain name space should be
> as unconstrained as is technically feasible?

There must be some consideration given to this.

> -Please explain your reasoning, including an explanation of technical
> limitations that you believe exist on the addition of new domains.

My understanding is that the limitations are not technical. The
questions that I have are policy based.

> 3. The Civil Society Statement provides that "ICANN should at all times
> strive to minimize costs." Recently, ICANN decided to charge $50,000
> nonrefundable application fees from anyone who proposes to create and
> operate new Top-Level Domains. Many experts fear that this system will
> prevent many non-commercial groups and individuals from making worthwhile
> suggestions.
>
> -Do you agree with the decision to charge these fees? Why or why not?

Yes and No. Initially lets see what we can learn from the commercial
groups. The $50k ensures the seriousness of the first few guinea pigs.
It is still early days. Keep in mind that domain names currently have
tremendous IP values.

> Issue #3: The Democracy Deficit
> 4. The Civil Society Statement suggests that "ICANN currently suffers from
a
> democracy deficit." For example, five of seven constituencies in the
Domain
> Name Supporting Organization (DNSO) are commercial in nature. Under the
> current rules, only 5 out of 19 seats on the ICANN Board will be publicly
> elected.
>
> -Do you agree that at least 10 Board seats should be filled by election,
> rather than only five? Why or why not?

Yes. I believe that the public elections are essential to ensure better
democracy. There are also many educational and community benefits to the
elections.

> 5. The Civil Society Statement argues that the DNSO should restructure its
> constituencies to reduce the apparently disproportionate representation
> given to business and intellectual property interests. Similarly, a number
> of experts believe the ICANN Board should encourage the addition of new
> constituencies (such as a constituency for individual users) to the DNSO
in
> order to provide balance.
>
> -Should the DNSO should be restructured to reduce the representation of
> business and intellectual property interests? Explain.

I am not well versed on this issue. From my understanding there is good
representation from many parties (7 constituencies) in the DNSO. There
may be a need for evolvement of the DNSO but I do not see any
overpowering influence of the business or IP interests.

> -Should the DNSO should include a new constituency for individual domain
> name holders?

I believe that individuals can fit into the current constituencies, but
I also support a new constituency. I can say that there are more than
ten cctld's in Africa that do not work. I would like to be effective in
assisting LIR's to get them to work.

> -Do you think membership rules of constituencies should ensure some
minimum
> representation of developing countries (e.g. 10%)? Why or why not?

It is useful to have good representation in all constituencies,
especially those that relate to developing countries. I don't believe in
quotas but if there is a problem then it should be looked into.

> Issue #4: Public Records and Transparency
> 6. The Civil Society Statement calls for ICANN to submit to independent
> audits.
>
> -Do you agree with this provision? Why or why not?

Yes. Resources must first be secured in an appropriate manner.

> -If you believe ICANN should undergo independent audits, what standard of
> evaluation should these audits follow?

A standard that is agreed upon by the relevant constituency.

> Issue #5: Expansion of ICANN's role
> 7. Do you feel it is ICANN's place to promote policies relating to conduct
> or content on the Internet? How so?

No. That goes very far beyond the realm of technical self-management.

> Issue #6: Domain name space as a globally-shared public resource
> 8. ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee has stated that "the [domain]
> name space is a public resource." Some observers fear that this assertion
> provides a basis for excessive state control. Likewise, a number of
experts
> feel that the natural monopoly model of country code TLD (ccTLD)
registries
> creates an opportunity for excessive control.
>
> -Should national governments control public resources in the domain name
> space? Explain.

No. I have seen a plan developed by my local government to do just this.
Please have a look at http://afridns.org/ and realize that this needs to
be done by qualified people that are recognized by LIR's and have the
ability to control cctld's effectively.

> Issue #7: Privacy
> 9. The authors of the Civil Society Statement fear that ICANN's policies
for
> domain name and address management might discourage the adoption of
genuine
> privacy enhancing techniques or undermine the right of anonymity. Some
> experts question whether ICANN has done enough to ensure individual votes
> will be kept secret. What is your assessment?

It was particularly difficult for me to get into the Q&A sections. I
have also received very good feedback from the community to date. I am
aware that elections.com are performing the election service and I
believe that they are best suited.



Although I have answered as honestly as possible, I would like to retain
the right to change my mind on any of the above issues at any time.

I hope this helps.

Sincerely,

Alan