<div dir="ltr">Its shocking to hear that we have been misled all along that jurisdiction is a part of Work Stream 2 of CCWG! Why couldn't NTIA be upfront while announcing the transition and list this condition as the 5th principle/criteria? They have extracted endless number of man hours from us under false promises of a bottom-up process whereas most of the major issues are being dictated top-down by the NTIA!<div><br></div><div>During the deliberations of the CWG and CCWG, there are two constant arguments used by status quoists that have dangled as sharp swords over the participants: </div><div>1) We suspect that the NTIA will not accept this change causing the transition to fail. </div><div>2) We suspect that the Board will not accept this change causing the transition to fail.<br><div><br></div><div>Ultimately, participants are so fearful of crossing these imaginary boundaries of what NTIA may accept, that we have started faithfully reproducing what NTIA desires. We are so fearful of a failed transition that we err on the side of status quo.</div><div><br></div><div>However, what hits me the most that the United States is selectively following multistakeholder processes where its convenient for them. The recent RZM proposal developed secretly by NTIA, Verisign and ICANN demonstrate that multistakeholder processes are endorsed by the United States only when its convenient to their interests.</div><div><br></div><div>I only wish the WSIS document, while endorsing multistakeholder processes, was substantive enough to recognise US dominant control (by corporate capture, by judicial control, by executive control and by legislative control) over multistakeholder processes and organisations as an issue that needs resolution over time. I dont understand the point behind living in denial. Who are we even fooling?</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Pranesh Prakash <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pranesh@cis-india.org" target="_blank">pranesh@cis-india.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Gene and Milton,<br>
Respectfully, you seem to have missed this bit from Larry's testimony before the House Sub-committee, which prompted this question.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://youtu.be/8v-yWye5I0w" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://youtu.be/8v-yWye5I0w</a><br>
<br>
"It's today, in the byelaws, that ICANN will remain in California, and of course their articles of incorporation as currently established require that it be a California corporation. So, there has been no proposal - serious proposal, made in the course of these discussions to move the location of ICANN outside of the United States. Frankly, if it were being proposed, I don't think that such a proposal would satisfy our criteria, specifically the one that requires that security and stability be maintained. So, we expect that this would continue on into the future."<br>
<br>
It's not just Strickling's view on what Congress would say, but the administration's precondition. Unless, of course he lied before the House Sub-committee.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Pranesh<br>
<div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 20 October 2015 12:35:47 pm GMT+01:00, Padmini <<a href="mailto:pdmnbaruah@gmail.com">pdmnbaruah@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>Oh no, Mr. Mueller. My question was two parts. Will US support a<br>
>change in<br>
>jurisdiction and will there be support for the multistakeholder in the<br>
>event that jurisdiction changes?<br>
>He said very eloquently - no.<br>
>On 20 Oct 2015 17:04, "Mueller, Milton L" <<br>
><a href="mailto:milton.mueller@pubpolicy.gatech.edu">milton.mueller@pubpolicy.gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> No quite accurate.<br>
>> He was asked whether the US Congress would support changing the<br>
>> jurisdiction of ICANN.<br>
>> He said no.<br>
>><br>
>> > -----Original Message-----<br>
>> > From: <a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-">governance-</a><br>
>> > <a href="mailto:request@lists.igcaucus.org">request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash<br>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 7:11 AM<br>
>> > To: BestBits <<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>>;<br>
>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
>> > Subject: [governance] US Support for Multistakeholder Governance is<br>
>> > Conditional on US Remaining in Control<br>
>> ><br>
>> > At a meeting with civil society actors, Larry Strickling of the US<br>
>NTIA<br>
>> was<br>
>> > asked by my colleague Padmini whether the US Congress would support<br>
>the<br>
>> > multistakeholder model if ICANN's jurisdiction were to shift.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > He said that it wouldn't.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > <a href="https://twitter.com/pranesh/status/656422297876561921" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/pranesh/status/656422297876561921</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > --<br>
>> > Pranesh Prakash<br>
>> > Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society<br>
><a href="http://cis-india.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://cis-india.org</a> |<br>
>> tel:+91<br>
>> > 80 40926283 <a href="mailto:sip%3Apranesh@ostel.co">sip:pranesh@ostel.co</a> | <a href="mailto:xmpp%3Apranesh@cis-india.org">xmpp:pranesh@cis-india.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="https://twitter.com/pranesh" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/pranesh</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ____________________________________________________________<br>
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br>
>><br>
<br>
--<br>
Pranesh Prakash<br>
Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society<br>
<a href="http://cis-india.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://cis-india.org</a> | tel:+91 80 40926283<br>
<a href="mailto:sip%3Apranesh@ostel.co">sip:pranesh@ostel.co</a> | <a href="mailto:xmpp%3Apranesh@cis-india.org">xmpp:pranesh@cis-india.org</a><br>
<a href="https://twitter.com/pranesh" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/pranesh</a><br>
<br>
</div></div>Sent over open standards using free software on a mobile device. Please excuse my brevity.<br>
<br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>