Re: [ICANN-EU] Comments about your view of ICANN squatters

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Griffini and all,

  I believe that the "David and Goliath" comparison is backwards here.
Rather it is the Stakeholders as a group that are the Goliath.  But still
the analogy doesn't fit in this comparison either.

  Big business cannot ever gain control of the DNS.  It is just not possible
unless it has the support of the Stakeholder community, or is not strongly
opposed.

 The @large is only recently formed because the ICANN Interim board
drug their feet in getting it formed.  As a result may policies such as the
Registrar policy and the UDRP were put into place by fiat.  And now
need serious revamping or done away with all together and started anew.
We hope and believe that this is, in part, what Karl was indirectly referring
to.  Karl, correct me if I am mistaken.

  No, Karl is right, this current ICANN board, along with it's original
"Interim Board" members needs to be brought to task strongly and
directly on many issues, without hesitation.  Otherwise big business
will take the view that they CONTROL the ICANN Board and any
future policies it may make or otherwise determine.  Small business
and individual DN holders as well as the rest of the stakeholder
community must take a strong and relentless stand on policy issues
that are currently in existence and may be put forth in the future.

Griffini Giorgio wrote:

> You wrote:
> >
> > > I would be interested in knowing your evalutation of the ICANN annoucement
> > > of 4 interim Members of the initial BoD  to stay 4 years instead of a few
> > > months and to represent you.
> >
> > Personally I feel that it is a breach of faith.
> >
> > Not that this is anything surprising or new - ICANN has from the outset
> > repeatedly broken its bond of trust with the Internet community.  Just
> > look at how ICANN has from its very first meeting flagrantly tossed aside
> > its obligations to "operate to the maximum extent feasible in an open and
> > transparent manner".  Just look at how ICANN deferred even the creation of
> > an at large membership.  And why did ICANN fill only a portion of the
> > at-large seats?
> >
> > By permitting this boardsquatting ICANN has once again slapped the
> > Internet community in the face.
> >
> >               --karl--
> >
>
> Karl,
> be aware that ICANN is under heavvy pressure on stating its role and many
> attempts to endanger it have been put in place also recently (with NSI
> multilingual domain names issue the most noticeable one).
> Also, there is nothing new in such decisions because they were written
> black-on-white even before the @large adventure was started.
> I'm not sure that is a good thing to exercise pressure on ICANN from our side
> (the @large membership) this way with the relevant risk to break the thing
> we are likely interested in partecipating in.
> I think a better approach would be to keep watching on what will develop and
> claim for  'bad faith'  when it actually makes some real damage rather than
> blame for it in advance.
> If we allow/contribute for a ICANN breakdown, large companies interests will
> take control of the DNS and I don't think this is what the membership@large
> would like to happen.
> We should go with a little care but be ready to fight when this is actually
> needed and/or appropriate. After all even David was successful with Goliath
> but he had to wait for the right moment for hitting him with that famous little
> stone...
>
> Best regards
> Giorgio Griffini

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members 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:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208