<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>RE: In the wake of RegisterFly, is ICANN taking
flight?</title></head><body>
<div>It seems there is a key distinction to be drawn here.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>When the larger world is the audience, then political realities
may require strong positions 'in opposition.' When CS is talking
to itself on the other hand, civility is likely prerequisite for
deliberations-in-the-group that have some hope to be productive.
At least that is what experience shows.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Both would have a place, according to circumstance.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>David</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>At 11:07 AM +0530 4/10/07, Parminder wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Hi Bertrand,</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">>There is
an important criteria to appreciate people's comments : do
they help everybody understand the issues or somebody's position
better ? do they introduce >principles that unify or principles
that divide ? do they help shape a better system, that will be more
just and more efficient for everybody ? or will they generate >more
anger and opposition ? </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Yours is a very constructive approach, and we should
constantly remind us of these virtues and ideals. I think it can help
a lot if each of us does reflect on these issues while participating
in this debate.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">With your permission, I will add a few riders to this
though. There are always some important differences in adherences to
values of what may be construed as civility between the insiders and
outsiders to a dominating system. Many may call the Seattle WTO
protests as uncivil, but to many they represent a watershed in
subaltern globalization and thus are almost sacred. So we need to see
the issues in terms of what may be called as weighted
neutrality.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">>Looking
forward to substantive and constructive contributions on the real
question : what is the future institutional architecture of Internet
Governance ? and >where should it be discussed
?</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">These are just the main questions we should be
focusing on.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">But it is important to understand the socio-political
context in which these questions become so
important.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">What is called the information society is deeply
impacting almost all social structures, and in times of such
far-reaching alignments it is natural that social power struggles
intensify. It is a natural phenomenon, and we need not self-delude
ourselves about it. And Internet is the key infrastructure of
the information society (IS), and thus its governance and polices have
important implication in these power struggles. That's why IG is
important to all of us.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">While these power struggles are going on at multiple
levels in the society (from, within the household to airline ticketing
industry) but it is easier to understand them through some
generalizationsŠ At the very basic level it is a power struggle
between ordinary individuals and institutions that have amassed
illegitimate power, and seek to use IS opportunities to
self-aggrandize. The state and the market are two important such
institutions. Civil society's (CS) struggle is to ensure that this
doesn't happen, and we are actually able to use IS opportunities to
shift the balance in favor of the ordinary
individual.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">All our discussions on censorship lie in this realm of
state versus individual power struggle in the IS. Incidentally, there
is less discussion on these forums on the market (market, not as
Adam's ideal, but the market institutions as they exist) versus
individual power equations.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Both these sets of struggles are important, but for
different placed people in differently placed societies one may look
more important than the otherŠ To make matters worse, in the
struggles against governments markets often look like a good ally, and
in struggle against markets (as they exist) governments look like a
good ally. All this complicates issues very much, and make for a very
political terrain.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">And then there is another important power struggle
among different groups of people, and different societies (countries,
if you will) who are differently placed and are using the IS context
for collective aggrand©izement (how much ever individuals within
societies may refuse to acknowledge their complicity in this, they
remain its beneficiaries and therefore in some ways accomplices). I
can describe many ways in which this is being done, but I wont because
I think it is widely debated and understood. The nature, governance
and policies of IG implicate this struggle as much as the
others.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">So when we address the essential questions you speak
about we need to identify the context in which different people and
different societies are placed vis a vis it. Such identification is
important as what you call as "</font>substantive and constructive
contributions on the real question'.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Whether my present inputs meets the criteria of
"</font>do they introduce principles that unify or principles that
divide ?"<font face="Arial" size="-1" color="#000080"> I am not so
sure.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">It depends on how we see it. If it intensifies our
adherence to our sectional interests, that it fails your criteria. But
if it helps to raise our consciousness, and discourse, towards
commonly accepted principles of fair play, justice (social, economic
and all) and equity, then it does.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Best</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080">Parminder</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080">________________________________________________</font
></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080">Parminder Jeet Singh</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080">IT for Change, Bangalore</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080"><i>Bridging Development Realities and Technological
Possibilities</i></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080">Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial Narrow" size="-1"
color="#808080">Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://www.itforchange.net/"><font face="Arial" size="-1"
color="#000080"><i>www.ITforChange.net</i></font></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<hr size="2"></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1"><b>From:</b> Bertrand de
La Chapelle [mailto:bdelachapelle@gmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, April 09, 2007 7:45 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.cpsr.org; yehudakatz@mailinator.com<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] Re: In the wake of RegisterFly, is
ICANN taking flight?</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">Point well
taken, Yehuda,</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">As you
mention, I was indeed mistaken by the spacing and attributed the words
to you. So my reminder is rather directed a M. Hanson (or Hansen).
:-)</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">On
substance, a very concrete element : the debate he refers to about the
legal status of ICANN - and in particular the recent mention in the
President's Strategic Report of the possible future evolution of its
legal status has nothing to do with the RegisterFly debacle. It very
much predates it and is on a completely different
level.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">The
discussion is part of the delicate issue of the future institutional
architecture of Internet Governance that occupied so much of the time
of the WSIS. ICANN was incorporated as a non-profit California
corporation in large part by lack of any other truly international
structure available, apart from intergovernmental treaty
organizations. Remember this was 1998.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">The
discussion today is about inventing the right type of
framework for truly multi-stakeholder governance mechanisms, as
Wolfgang and I have consistently argued. Examining existing models
(such as the Red Cross or other Fertilizer association) is only food
for thought and not a direct comparison in terms of
functionalities. Nobody can claim he/she has the ultimate
solution. And we all have a joint responsibility to invent it. As
Saint Exupery said : "You cannot predict the future, but you can
enable it".</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">The most
difficult activity in the coming months and years will be to separate
the right questions from conspiracy theories; and to do so
without appearing to look down upon people who are coming into
the discussion without the ten-year background information on the
debates that already took place. in particular, could
everybody accept that it is possible to point ICANN's
shortcomings and try to remedy them, and at the same time recognize
that people working in it and its board members in particular are also
trying to do good and are not just mischevious machiavelian traitors
to the cause of the global Internet Community
? </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">I see the
present debate heating up with a mixture of attraction and fear :
attraction because such discussions are long overdue and it
is worth having them : the underlying issues are essential; but fear
also because common sense can be easily overcome by righteous passions
and mutual respect is rapidly lost in the
process. </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">There is
an important criteria to appreciate people's comments : do
they help everybody understand the issues or somebody's position
better ? do they introduce principles that unify or principles that
divide ? do they help shape a better system, that will be more just
and more efficient for everybody ? or will they generate more anger
and opposition ? </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">The latter
is easier. But let's give credit to those who try more constructive
approaches. This does not mean there should be no debate,
quite on the contrary, but just that it should pit ideas against ideas
rather than people against people. Unless these people are renouncing
their very humanity and, carried away by the seduction of their own
arguments, become mere instruments of the ideas they believe
in.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">Looking
forward to substantive and constructive contributions on the real
question : what is the future institutional architecture of Internet
Governance ? and where should it be discussed
?</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman">Best</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">Bertrand<br>
--<br>
____________________<br>
Bertrand de La Chapelle<br>
On a personnal basis and not as an official French position.<br>
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br>
<br>
"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes"
Antoine de Saint Exupéry<br>
("there is no better mission for humans than uniting
humans")</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman"> </font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman"><br>
</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman">On
4/9/07,</font> <a href="mailto:yehudakatz@mailinator.com"><font
face="Times New Roman"><b>yehudakatz@mailinator.com</b></font></a><font
face="Times New Roman"> <</font><a
href="mailto:yehudakatz@mailinator.com"><font
face="Times New Roman">yehudakatz@mailinator.com</font></a><font
face="Times New Roman"> > wrote:</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
face="Times New Roman">Bertrand,<br>
<br>
Just to clairify, the statements were from an artical, and are not my
words.<br>
<br>
<br>
</font><a
href=
"http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/icann_registerfly_litigation"
><font
face="Times New Roman"
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/icann_registerfly_litigation</font
></a><font face="Times New Roman"><br>
<br>
<br>
I think the Author [Burke Hansen] a US citizen, realizes that ICANN
was<br>
incorporated as " a nonprofit public benefit corporation ... "
and<br>
<br>
His point is in regards to ICANN working under the status of an
International<br>
Organization (Body), and using that status as an indemnifying shield,
from<br>
legal culpability.<br>
<br>
<br>
The comparison He made was with the International Red Cross and
International<br>
Olympic Committee (IOC)<br>
<br>
re:<br>
<br>
"... Why would ICANN need Red Cross-style international legal
protections when<br>
it's not out saving refugees and inoculating babies like the Red
Cross? The<br>
international organization that ICANN does have something in common
with is one<br>
famous for its opaqueness and arrogant lack of accountability, the<br>
International Olympic Committee (IOC). ICANN's not saving the world.
Like it or<br>
not, ICANN is engaged in commerce, not charity work, although it is
a<br>
California nonprofit corporation. The IOC, too, is engaged in
commerce, which<br>
is marketing the Olympics and extorting stadium facilities out of
local<br>
communities. It would be unfortunate if ICANN were to take advantage
of the<br>
RegisterFly mess as an excuse to lock itself away from public opinion
the way<br>
the IOC has. ..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Being a US Non-Profit Organization, does not create an 'International
Body', of<br>
which sanctioning of its "International" status ironically
could be done by the<br>
U.N.<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
</font><a
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"><font
face="Times New Roman">governance@lists.cpsr.org</font></a><font
face="Times New Roman"><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
</font><a
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org"><font
face="Times New Roman">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</font></a
><font face="Times New Roman"><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
</font><a
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"><font
face="Times New Roman">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</font
></a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Times New Roman"><br>
<br>
</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>