[bestbits] US Support for Multistakeholder Governance is Conditional on US Remaining in Control

[William Drake]

Hi

FWIW I was sitting next to Larry and understood Padmini to be asking whether the US Congress would support ICANN leaving the US.  I believe he did too, and hence his emphatic answer was that no, the Congress has said clearly that it will not support this.  He then noted that some governments have raised the consequent question of jurisdiction over disputes and suggested this is an appropriate matter to get into.  So I was puzzled when I saw your message because he did not say anything about multistakeholder governance, much less whether "US Support for Multistakeholder Governance is Conditional on US Remaining in Control.”

It may be that we didn’t understand the question correctly and mistakenly focused on the ICANN leaving piece, as she was at the end of a long table. But if her question was exactly as you’re reporting it then his answer was clearly non-responsive, in which case a less inventive interpretation would seem apt.

Best

Bill


> On Oct 20, 2015, at 12:11 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
> 
> At a meeting with civil society actors, Larry Strickling of the US NTIA was asked by my colleague Padmini whether the US Congress would support the multistakeholder model if ICANN's jurisdiction were to shift.
> 
> He said that it wouldn't.
> 
> https://twitter.com/pranesh/status/656422297876561921
> 
> -- 
> Pranesh Prakash
> Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
> http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
> sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
> https://twitter.com/pranesh
>