[governance] ICANN Board Vote Signals Era of Censorship in Domain Names

[Mawaki Chango]

This exactly is where the whole problem comes from. As far as
design goes, ICANN is a fantastic patchwork, at best. If ICANN
was a mere technical coordinator, then there is wide
institutional hole for related and inevitable policy. Some think
it is filled by the shadow of the US government. Problem is the
latter intervenes only on a very ad-hoc basis, or in a very
circuitous way. So the less one can say is the policy authority
of, or related to, ICANN is discontinuous, "discrete", immature,
constantly on the verge of both stiff arbitrary and pre-mature
deliquescence, etc.

ICANN has constantly be playing a role it really was neither
designed nor equiped to play, the role someone doesn't want to
play overtly, the role someone doesn't want anyone else to play.
The question is how long will this last? And also, At this
point, can the world practically afford to leave the policy role
related to the DNS totally vacant? If not, how and by whom this
role should be fulfilled?

Meanwhile, the transition has unfortunately been on and on...
too long, untill now all the governments are realizing what
power they can exert over the central infrastructure of the Net
(as opposed to just minding their domestic policies and trying
to enforce them somewhere between the end user and the ISPs.) In
a short while, they will all love ICANN and oppose any
institutional change; the cacophony has only started with this
.xxx debate.

Mawaki


--- Carlos Afonso <ca at rits.org.br> wrote:

> 
> 
> Milton Mueller wrote:
> ...
> 
> > Are you begging the question? The issue we are debating is
> whether
> > something like this should be a "policy decision" at all, or
> whether
> > ICANN is a coordinator of the root that focuses on technical
> criteria.
> 
> Clearly not on technical criteria alone -- otherwise probably
> the whole
> new TLD delegation process could be made almost automatic. And
> clearly
> ICANN is a body which has to handle/listen to national policy
> questions
> as well, which interfere with and inform its overall
> decisions, reason
> why it has the GAC in its innards, as well as many
> "non-technical" civil
> society organizations.
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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