[governance] U.N. takeover of the Internet must be stopped, U.S. warns

Avri Doria avri at ella.com
Fri Jun 1 16:15:19 EDT 2012 

Hi,

 The host country agreement arrangement means:

1, you design the by-laws, charter, oversight and appeal mechanisms to include the transparency and protections that are needed.  You don't rely on the happenstance of California and US rules, but pick the multistakeholder participatory democratic form that is most appropriate for the organization.

2. you then make an agreement with a country to domicile that within a specific country and agree to follow specific laws, such as health and wellbeing of employees, and other local ordinance etc as are reasonable for an institution in that country.

Milton: it is not that the law is too parochial for people in Zimbabwe, it is being subject to US law on Zimbabwe is not acceptable to people from Zimbabwe who happen to be dealing with an international common public resource.

Robert: IOC is not the only exemplar there are many.  And they are required to be as transparent as their charter, bylaws and other institutional rules make them.

Lee: I think that these can either be treaty based like the IFRC or non treaty based.  Of course with my political persuasion I am recommending a non treaty based institution.  But it could probably work either way - in the best of all possible worlds (my view of course, and not something I am hopeful of seeing in my lifetime) it would be possible for the governments to agree on an arrangement that made themselves peers in a well formed multistakeholder model.

avri


On 1 Jun 2012, at 15:26, Lee W McKnight wrote:

> HI,
> 
> My 5 cents:
> 
> Because ICANN is now subject to California law, and hence operates in conformance with its legal requirements; it is relatively straightforward to include in a future hypothetical  host country agreement cross-reference to particular legal standards that must be followed by the organization, and methods of recourse for aggrieved parties.  I believe.  I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet.
> 
> And, if we are now building a host country agreement from scratch, we might for example insert European data protection standards into that agreement. 
> 
> Of course, the whole point of the exercise would be to further augment the organization's openness, transparency, and accessibility. Just because the International Olympic Committee is closest in business model to FIFA in terms of non-transparency and raining favors on anointed insiders, doesn't mean all international organizations must.
> 
> As far as I know, the International Red Cross, for example, operating in most nations, manages to be open and accessible to average citizens while also going toe to toe with governments when they need to.  
> 
> The point is, if the solution is agreed to be internationalization, then - internationalize the thing, but not in a way that shuts people, or for that matter, governments or businesses, out.  And yes the devil is in the details which will need to be laboriously worked out which will take years....presuming there is even a willingness to consider. Perfect topic for IGF workshops for x years ; ).
> 
> Lee 
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Robert Guerra [rguerra at privaterra.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 3:05 PM
> To: Internet Governance Caucus
> Subject: Re: [governance] U.N. takeover of the Internet must be stopped, U.S. warns
> 
> +1 
> 
> In order to have a "host country" agreement, would require - if i'm not mistaken - the same type of legal status the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has. IOC isn't a terribly open and transparent organization.
> 
> We need more, not less transparency, openness and accountability at ICANN - not less.
> 
> regards
> 
> Robert
> 
> --
> R. Guerra
> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081
> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom 
> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org
> 
> On 2012-06-01, at 2:54 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
>> Can someone explain to me what a "host country agreement" accomplishes for Internet users and service operators?
>>  
>> My vague understanding of it is that from a legal perspective, such agreements can actually immunize the organization from various forms of legal accountability which, imho, is not something we want to do. For example, ICANN _should_ be subject to antitrust law; it _should_  be subject to the membership requirements of California public benefit law (and stop pretending that it doesn't have members).
>>  
>> And, those of you who want this to happen because California law is too remote and parochial for, say a villager in Zimbabwe, please explain to me how a host country agreement in Geneva is any more accessible to a villager in Zimbabw? The government of Zimbabwe, perhaps, but the people there?
>>  
>> This could just be my own ignorance of a what a host country agreement is, but please, let's make the rights and benefits it affords Netizens the standard here, not conformity to past intergovernmental patterns.
>> --MM
>>  
>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of William Drake [william.drake at uzh.ch]
>> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 11:07 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] U.N. takeover of the Internet must be stopped, U.S. warns
>> 
>>  
>> On Jun 1, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I personally beleive, and have believed for a long time, that it should have a host country agreement with an appropriate host country.
>>  
>> Me too, and we are waiting patiently here in Geneva.   But on the off chance that proves a tough sell in certain quarters, how about something more incremental: independent of the USG, with a host country agreement, in the US?  There's a few international organizations there that have these already…
>>  
>> Bill
>>  
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> 
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> 
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list