<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
<br>I both agree and urge some caution, John. It takes more work on the 'ground' to support states <div>that are challenged with learning about, and launching [whether government or Private Sector/NGO] initiatives</div><div>to bring vast new numbers of users onto the Internet/WWW/online services. </div><div><br></div><div>If we leave the only solution to be events, workshops, etc organized by the ITU, we are missing our </div><div>own role, and responsibilities, and opportunities. </div><div><br></div><div>Treaties are not good things, when they are top down. When they codify national laws and agreements,</div><div>they can add value. I am probably unique among business players, having helped to change three major </div><div>treaties/agreements in my long ago past -- being at the table is a vast challenge, and having a legitimate voice</div><div>is even a greater challenge -- whether technical expert, business executive, or NGO. Never underestimate the</div><div>challenge to have a place at the table to provide gentle, informed, 'advice' that just provides much needed</div><div>information and facts that can help to support a negotiation. </div><div><br></div><div>Treaty negotiations, by nature, preclude that. That is the risk. And that is the oportunity -- it is not </div><div>ITU versus ICANN. It is 'different models of consultation versus old style discussions and negotiations. </div><div><br></div><div>And the IGF is a key part of the new eco system. </div><div><br></div><div>Marilyn Cade</div><div><br><br><br>> From: jcurran@arin.net<br>> To: avri@acm.org<br>> CC: governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 19:17:51 -0400<br>> Subject: Re: [governance] ITU vs. ICANN<br>> <br>> > Bottom line, the provisions of the Plenipot are only binding upon states with the consent of the state.<br>> <br>> You are correct in principle, but in practice treaties are rather <br>> complicated objects which exist to facilitate cooperation on matters<br>> of shared interest. I'm not going to make arguments on behalf of the <br>> ITU, but will note that states participate for a wide range of interests <br>> and hence overwhelmingly seek to comply with resulting recommendations<br>> (so that they may in turn benefit from recommendations in other areas). <br>> While we may see the Internet as the most important topic of all, it is <br>> only one of many being discussed at the ITU Plenipotentiary meeting. It <br>> is far better to educate states so that they can make good recommendations<br>> than having to deal with bad recommendations after the fact...<br>> <br>> /John<br>> <br>> John Curran<br>> President and CEO<br>> ARIN<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>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance<br>> <br>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t<br></div> </body>
</html>