<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV id=yiv2094677906>
<DIV>It should not be the role of International Internet Governance to hand over control to individuals. Human Rights are not a turnkey operation. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As netizens we have a responsibility to work at it. Better to let those who really fight for it, have it. Until we have universal internet voting rights we must be careful who we crown.<BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 10/1/09, Paul Lehto <I><lehto.paul@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul@gmail.com><BR>Subject: Re: [governance] POST JPA<BR>To: governance@lists.cpsr.org, "Vanda Scartezini" <vanda@uol.com.br><BR>Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 7:58 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>One has to read the corporate spin with ICANN, as with all<BR>corporations, with a lens to eliminate the happy-talk corporate PR<BR>aspects and the weasel words. The key sentences at icann.org are the<BR>following:<BR><BR>"[ICANN and Commerce's agreement] declares ICANN is **independent**<BR>and **not controlled** by any one entity. [It's not controlled by any<BR>combination, either, though it speaks of various ones] It commits<BR>ICANN to reviews performed BY THE COMMUNITY – a further recognition<BR>that the multi-stakeholder model is robust enough to review itself.<BR>[We can all review ICANN, three times a day if we wish. It doesn't<BR>mean anything, however, when push comes to shove, which is the<BR>DECISIVE issue, it's not just an "issue" it's a decisive "controlling"<BR>issue, as it were.]<BR><BR>"The Affirmation is of **long standing** and is not limited to the<BR>three years for which previous agreements
operated. [Corporate<BR>Independence Forever and Uber Alles!]<BR><BR>The Government **Advisory** Committee's role is reaffirmed. And the<BR>GAC is a key participant in selecting the membership of the review<BR>teams. ["advisory" is a critical word, and it means zero control of<BR>ICANN]<BR><BR>At bottom, ICANN is released to "partner" with whoever they choose,<BR>probably just the large vested financial interests. They may choose<BR>in fact to create the world's most diverse advisory body, but it's all<BR>an orwellian illusion if the public, whether in the USA or around the<BR>globe, has no enforceable control. to add insult to injury,<BR>privatizing ICANN completely also means no claims of constitutional<BR>rights can be made against ICANN in court -- at least that's the<BR>position of all private corporations accepting privatization<BR>initiatives. The details are irrelevant, no matter how good they<BR>are. If in fact
they come up with great policy somehow it will be the<BR>actions of philosopher kings and/or queens, not the actions of an<BR>accountable democratic body committed to public input.<BR><BR>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor<BR><BR><BR>On 10/1/09, Vanda Scartezini <<A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vanda@uol.com.br" target=_blank rel=nofollow>vanda@uol.com.br</A>> wrote:<BR>> Dear list<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> The ICANN's independence with the end of JPA can be seen at icann.org. We<BR>> have translated Rod's speech to Portuguese to make it easy for all<BR>> Portuguese speaking colleagues.<BR>><BR>> Best to all<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Vanda Scartezini<BR>><BR>> POLO Consultores Associados<BR>><BR>> & IT Trend<BR>><BR>> Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8<BR>><BR>> 01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.<BR>><BR>> Fone + 55 11 3266.6253<BR>><BR>> Mob + 5511
8181.1464<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From: Willie Currie [mailto:<A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=wcurrie@apc.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>wcurrie@apc.org</A>]<BR>> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM<BR>> To: <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance@lists.cpsr.org</A>; Avri Doria<BR>> Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes<BR>><BR>> which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year<BR>><BR>> cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair<BR>><BR>> or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of<BR>><BR>> the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an
increased<BR>><BR>> role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of<BR>><BR>> oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the<BR>><BR>> Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within<BR>><BR>> six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is<BR>><BR>> no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is<BR>><BR>> not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have<BR>><BR>> the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the<BR>><BR>> instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation<BR>><BR>> by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing<BR>><BR>> in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.'<BR>><BR>> So the Board remains the key body of power within
ICANN and the least<BR>><BR>> accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN<BR>><BR>> community to dismiss the Board.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral<BR>><BR>> US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil<BR>><BR>> society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the<BR>><BR>> recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN<BR>><BR>> Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as<BR>><BR>> it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed<BR>><BR>> by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including<BR>><BR>> Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may<BR>><BR>> be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in
a<BR>><BR>> multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review<BR>><BR>> process and perhaps its soft power.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Willie<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Avri Doria wrote:<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>>> Hi Mc tim,<BR>><BR>>>><BR>><BR>>>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing<BR>><BR>>>> changed ?<BR>><BR>>>><BR>><BR>>>> B.<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> And something did change.<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer<BR>><BR>>> about.<BR>><BR>>> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't<BR>><BR>>> chair for right of
participation.<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant<BR>><BR>>> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> a.<BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> ____________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>><BR>>> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>><BR>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>><BR>>> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>>> For all list information and functions,
see:<BR>><BR>>> <A href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>><BR>>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> ____________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>><BR>> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>><BR>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>><BR>> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> For all list information and functions, see:<BR>><BR>> <A href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>><BR>><BR><BR><BR>-- <BR>Paul R Lehto, J.D.<BR>P.O. Box #1<BR>Ishpeming, MI 49849<BR><A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lehto.paul@gmail.com" target=_blank rel=nofollow>lehto.paul@gmail.com</A><BR>906-204-4026<BR>____________________________________________________________<BR>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow>governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR><BR>For all list information and functions, see:<BR> <A
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></td></tr></table>