[governance] ICANN DOC: The EU commission's perspective

[Adam Peake]

I think Milton's right:

At 5:32 PM -0400 10/2/06, Milton Mueller wrote:
>  I don't know why the EU asserts that it does, 
>unless they are trying to create a 
>self-fulfilling prophecy.


And also that the IGP interpretation swings to 
the other extreme.  An overly negative 
interpretation may be equally self-fulfilling. 
Suspect the "truth" may be somewhere in between.

Veni, as a board member I think you're expected 
to look carefully at all sides. For sure you 
should be very concerned about the Whois issue 
IGP raises (issues your colleague Susan Crawford 
also mentions).

I hope you would also be concerned about senior 
management and leadership discussions with NTIA 
and want to ensure there's transparency and 
community input to these discussions.  At the 
risk of sounding like a bit of a conspiracy 
theorist ... in an email to the GNSO chair, Paul 
Twomey wrote "There is no requirement to report 
regularly to the DOC. The DOC will simply meet 
with senior ICANN staff from time to time." 
<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg02874.html >. 
The "leadership" part (that's you by the way) 
overlooked already, or just Paul's email short 
hand.  Hope you will make sure it's the latter.

You should be careful not to dismiss what IGPs 
saying just because it's negative (perhaps overly 
negative). There's a lot of sense in there and if 
you aren't at least considering all aspects of 
the agreement then you're screwing up.

Thanks,

Adam



>Milton,
>why do you have to be so unhappy when people are 
>saying that the end of the MoU is good for the 
>Internet?
>What if the IGP analysis you quote might have 
>misinterpreted the wording of the JPA? I guess 
>there's a problem here because you already have 
>an opinion, and you consider it the only right 
>opinion. If you have had questions, then we 
>could have a discussion. But when people enter a 
>discussion with formed opinions, the discussion 
>can't happen.
>
>best,
>veni
>
>
>
>At 05:32 PM 02.10.2006 '?.'öÑ¶Ü  -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
>>It is an interesting statement. I think they 
>>are either misinformed, or wish to encourage 
>>the US to move into the right direction by 
>>praising them, even though there is no evidence 
>>or guarantee that the current agreement does 
>>move in that direction.
>>
>>In particular, the Commission's response 
>>completely overlooks the highly prescriptive 
>>approach to Whois policy that was put into the 
>>new agreement (see IGP analysis 
>>http://www.internetgovernance.org/news.html#ICANNoldwine_093006) 
>>However, by taking this approach the Commission 
>>is able to claim that the US is moving in the 
>>direction that the Tunis Agenda and its calls 
>>for "enhanced cooperation" said it would move. 
>>That makes it appear as if its call for 
>>"enhanced cooperation" in WSIS was not a 
>>complete failure.  In my opinion, it will be a 
>>complete failure unless the EC strongly 
>>confronts the US on Whois.
>>
>>Another point, which is not ambiguous or 
>>debatable: the current JPA does _not_ introduce 
>>any guarantee that the relationship will end in 
>>2009. I don't know why the EU asserts that it 
>>does, unless they are trying to create a 
>>self-fulfilling prophecy.
>>
>
>
>Sincerely,
>Veni Markovski
>http://www.veni.com
>
>check also my blog:
>http://blog.veni.com
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
>For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance