<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; font-size:10pt;"><FONT style="FONT-FAMILY: ; COLOR: #000000" color=#000000 size=2 face=Verdana>
<DIV>All, (Please hear me out before you delete!)</DIV>
<DIV> The main responsibility of the US congress as relates to the internet is to protect the interests of the American people and the resources the nation has deployed. (granted, it often does a poor job of that, too!) It is important to note, especially for the large number of you outside the USA, that there is absolutely nothing to prevent you from establishing your own national or regional server systems and forging alliances with others as they benefit your people. In such a world, the cultural norms of each nation or region can be addressed without concern of conflict with the norms of another region. Each can exercise the "net neutrality" it finds appropriate in its system and in its region and the systems can all hold the Top Level Domains they wish to and add some that would be of particular regional interest without having to go through long and very expensive hassles with ICANN each time. The only things needed to make a multi-system internet work is a body to prevent potential naming collisions on what would then be a wider and more diverse namespace. The TLDA, Inc. (<a href="http://www.tldainc.org/" target=_blank>http://www.tldainc.org/</a>) is a non-profit organization set up and now maturing so as to be able to provide this TLD research and coordination and other related services for the many current and future root systems of the world, allowing each to thrive in its own way, and yet protecting all of them from potential collisions in the event that other systems would want to carry their regional TLDs as well as their own.</DIV>
<DIV> Remember the original meaning of "internet", the inter-relationship of many networks for the common good. ICANN's self-serving policy is a stone around the neck of the American people, and MUST seem even worse for other nations and cultures wanting to see a vibrant and living internet name space. Why spend all your time trying to push the ICANN mountain when you can reasonably build your own highways and bi-ways in your own regions and tie them together where it is beneficial to your people and remain aloof in some other areas if that is best for your system and people. Much of the world has complained for years of American control over such resources as the internet. Why? Why not build their own and make it flourish ans serve their people as they see fit?</DIV>
<DIV> There is no reason for the EU or the Arab League or Latin America or China to care what a mess ICANN makes! They should make competitive systems, each fitting their region's cultural needs, and tie them together where it makes sense by carrying some of the same TLDs and perhaps not some others, all by local choice. Why not turn the conversation to what everyone else can do to make a better internet, and NOT just on how to twist and force ICANN into being what it can not understand how to be, a responsive and responsible internet body? If each major population that has a stake in the internet actually invested in it, they would have what they want with FAR less trouble. Then, you would be REAL stakeholder and not just an unhappy user group.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-Karl E. Peters</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-FAMILY: verdana; COLOR: black; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" webmail="1">
<DIV>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: AW: [governance] US Congress & the JPA<BR>From: "Kleinwächter,_Wolfgang"<BR><wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de><BR>Date: Sun, June 07, 2009 5:20 am<BR>To: governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR><BR>The whole hearing was an astonishing piece of ignorance by some US congress members and some US industry representatives with regard to legitimate interests of stakeholders and nations around the world. Look into the references of the study of the Technology Policy Institute (Lenard/White) - which was obviously the main source for members of the committee - and you get a clue what you can expect if these groups will get decision making power over the future of Internet Governance ;-(((. If this happens we will see another round of a global ideological battles over the future of the Internet with numerous unitended side effects, very counterproducitve both to the globnal Internet community and the US itself. The global view was totally ouf of the radar of the majority of the committee members and some of the panelists. What a gulf between the open eyes of the elected president and the narrow view of these group of people. <BR><BR>Wolfgang<BR><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><a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target=_blank mce_href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></span></body></html>