<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">"<i>Corn cannot expect justice from a
court of chickens.</i>"<br>
<br>
;-)<br>
<br>
@+, best, Dom<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 14/10/12 11:17, Louis Pouzin (well) a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+EjHYpq57mNBkEa3yJp43ac2JLyk+icuYqhAvwEv1qM8hNPdw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi,<br>
<br>
ICANN is both a regulator and a vendor of services based on its
regulations. This is just the same as a private standard body
taking patents on its own standards and collecting license fees.<br>
<br>
Rhetoric of equitable, neutral, accountable, transparent,
multi-stakeholder, public interest, bottom up (or down), belongs
to outreach (aka propaganda). We know the reality, and we know it
cannot change.<br>
<br>
The reason it cannot change is that ICANN's structure is by design
a locus of permanent conflicts of interests. A self proclaimed
world monopoly, without voting members, nor international statute,
collecting hundreds millions $, without paying taxes anywhere, is
already liable to suspicion. Are the costs justified by provided
services, or are services the by-product of a racket ?<br>
<br>
Humans not being angels, it would be very naive to believe that
ICANN's decision makers would stricly ignore their own personal
and future interests. And this is to last as long as regulation
and services provision keep hiding behind the smoke screen of a
single organization.<br>
<br>
Another flame (not from Kieren McCarthy).<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/</a><br>
<br>
Louis<br>
- - -<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM,
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="im"> <font face="Verdana"> <br>
</font>
<div>On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-size:12pt;font-family:times new
roman,new york,times,serif">
<div>Hi </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div
style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt">Interesting story of the
never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time
on .africa?<br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font face="Verdana">But isnt the problem of conflict of
interest structural to multistakeholder (MS) governance
(not multistakeholder policy inputs, but actual
governance) because MS governance is about those who
have interest (or stake) being part of decision making
processes. ICANN board and its various decision making
committees, for instance, are full of people from the
domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed
to regulate. Could one, coming from an old fashioned
democratic tradition, even think of US's Federal
Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory
Authority of India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel
respectively! No, certainly not, it would be
unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's </font><font
face="Verdana">world of </font>MSism. <br>
</div>
<font face="Verdana"> <br>
Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is
window dressing, when the going, and the press, becomes
too blatantly bad, as in the case of their former
Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual
it is interested parties laying global CIR policies all
the way, and the public or the supposed reps of the public
sit in the gallery and clap enthusiastically about the
untold wonders of MSism.<br>
<br>
This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say<br>
</font>
<blockquote>“Icann must place commercial and financial
interests in their appropriate context,” said Mr.
Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post in
July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from
the very domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate
independently? </blockquote>
<font face="Verdana"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA"
target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA</a>
<br>
<br>
See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest
in ICANN at <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923"
target="_blank">http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923</a>
.<br>
<br>
Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the
democratic system of governance in India, but I can assure
you that if any governmental/policy organisation in India
approached anywhere near the conflict of interest mess
that ICANN is, it would take one public interest
litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it
folded up in a matter of days, even if the government
itself does not fold it up (which too I am sure it would
do on its own).<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
parminder </font></span></font><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>