[governance] RE: JPA

[McTim]

On 5/25/09, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>  Thanks Milton a few points below
>



MM: ICANN still lacks adequate accountability. Its bottom up processes can
> be ignored, bypassed or dictated top-down by its Board, or manipulated by
> its policy staff. Its Independent Review Process is inadequate. Its
> relationship to international law ambiguous. The rights of people to
> challenge its actions on the basis of established law unclear.
>
> IP: Do we really want to include text to this effect?
>
>

I would think not.


    5. The current JPA called for NTIA to conduct a mid-term review.
> That review revealed that ICANN needed to take further steps to
> increase institutional confidence related to long-term stability,
> accountability, responsiveness, continued private sector leadership,
> stakeholder participation, increased contract compliance, and enhanced
> competition. What steps has ICANN taken to address the concerns
> expressed in the mid-term review process? Have these steps been
> successful? If not, what more could be done to meet the needs of the
> community served in these areas?
>
> Most of the agenda of the mid-term review was set by the IP lobby.
>
>     6. The JPA between the Department of Commerce and ICANN is an
> agreement by mutual consent to effectuate the transition of the
> technical coordination and management of the Internet DNS in a manner
> that ensures the continued stability and security of the Internet DNS.
> Has sufficient progress been achieved for the transition to take place
> by September 30, 2009? If not, what should be done? What criteria
> should be used to make that determination?
>
> IGC BELIEVES THAT SUFFICIENT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE IN THESE AREAS FOR THIS
> TRANSITION TO TAKE PLACE.
> MM: I am beginning to question this.
>
> IP: But a decade of JPAs havent solved that nor will another decade of
> JPAs.  Milton, have you suggested text here? As there will be no consensus
> here to continue the JPA, can we agree the JPA should cease?
>
>
Yes.



Or is there a specific measure we want to propose that expresses concerns in
> a way that makes it clear the JPA should not continue? Or should we remain
> silent? This is the real crux of this process...
>
>

It seems that many are on this list for this very issue, so I for one would
be disappointed if we didn't make a statement of some sort either yea or
nay.  I say yea, let the JPA expire and ICANN stand on it's own.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim

"A name indicates what we seek.  An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090525/92413399/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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