[governance] USG on ICANN - no movement here

[Milton L Mueller]

Wow, John, 
It's ok to remind us that the US position has not changed, but I am
wondering why you feel the need to construct weak and biased apologia
for US control. 

.xxx controversy a "gentle hint?" I am rolling on the floor with
laughter. You might want to review the facts, the FOIA documents are
still up on the web. 

ICANN needs DoC adult supervision? If you have watched DoC and its
supervisor, U.S. Congress, I wonder where you find the adults? Did you
consider the caving in to the religious right's email campaign an
example of how "adult" this is? 

And could you explain (I know you won't of course, because no one can)
exactly what this "adult supervision" accomplishes, what value it adds? 

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Levine [mailto:icggov at johnlevine.com]
> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 6:11 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Cc: ian.peter at ianpeter.com
> Subject: Re: [governance] USG on ICANN - no movement here
> 
> >DOC has commented on ICANN's call for comments on improving
institutional
> >confidence at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_080730.html
> >
> >The statement reads like an end of term report for a non-performing
> student,
> >with barely a word of encouragement.
> 
> The US DOC has always made it crystal clear that they will never under
> any plausible conditions relinquish their authority over the DNS root
> and, hence, over ICANN.  This policy has never changed, and their
> recent note contains no surprises to anyone who's been paying
> attention.  There has certainly been feverish wishful thinking inside
> and outside of ICANN imagining that somehow ICANN and the root will
> float free, but it ain't going to happen.
> 
> The US DOC are not stupid, and they have been extremely careful not to
> act in ways that would impinge on the sovereignty of other countries,
> so although there's been a certain amount of harrumphing on principle
> from some governments, in reality they know that ICANN desperately
> needs the DOC's adult supervision.  The only perceptible thing the DOC
> has done in recent years has been to give a gentle hint that .XXX
> would not be a good idea, a hint with which I dare say all the
> harrumphing governments would agree.
> 
> So do what you want to try to set up Internet governance processes,
> but don't waste your time imagining that the DOC will go away.
> 
> R's,
> John
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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