[governance] Second Draft of Statement on USCommerceDepartment/GAC chairintervention

[Veni Markovski]

At 01:34 22-08-05  -0400, Hans Klein wrote:
>I strongly agree that this is a very significant incident.  It is the first
>"political" use by the US of its authority over the root.

Hans, I agree with you in principle, however, I think in this case there 
are no proofs for this.

>First, the US veto of the new TLD is a unilateral exercise of its authority
>over the root.  It manifests the unique power that the US has.

While you may consider a nice way to veto, I think that another month or 
two delay is certainly not a veto.

>Second, this action is based on explicitly socio-political concerns (as
>opposed to techno-administrative concerns.)  It is a "political" action. So
>the claim of neutrality is shattered.

? No government has ever claimed their decisions will be ased on 
technical-administrative concerns. ICANN's agreement to ICM letter for 
another period of time delay is a different story, but it's still not 
driven of socio-political concerns. What was ICANN supposed to do, when ICM 
says, "Give us another month"? Vote against that?

>So we now have a case where unilateral control of the root by one country
>allows it to impose its political will on the Internet.

While I would have agreed with you, I think you need to wait to see if 
something like that would happen in the future. The .xxx is still on the 
agenda.

veni 

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance