[governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance

Sun Dec 1 13:33:05 EST 2013

Milton, 

Aren't there 3 aspects here?
- statutes and bylaw (under which and to which jurisdiction to go in case of crime, felony, liability - how the entity works, how the entity wants to rule itself  )
- mandate ( in the case of ICANN it obeys to a mandate for the US Gov, not to a law)
- US policy and US law as it applies to all its citizens, corps, non profit if concerned.

In case of a Swiss 'idea', you've got two options - one is Swiss, the other one is international
- If it is given and recognized a special statute such the Red Cross, then you have not necessarily a Swiss jurisdiction, but an international jurisdiction
- A mandate? Such an organization could have several bodies to take its mandate from: an entity having signed a contract with the UN, belonging to the UN system but not being a UN agency or program. Many entities are older than the UN. They have agreed to be part of the UN system, still retaining their own specific constituencies. So you have a couple of options.

To be explored

JC


Le 1 déc. 2013 à 19:15, Milton L Mueller a écrit :

> Parminder,
> 2 questions for you. 
> 
> 1. By US laws you mean merely that ICANN is incorporated in California under its nonprofit corp law? That law does not make ICANN subject to US policy (although the MoU did, the IANA contract still does to some extent, and the Affirmation of Commitments also incorporates elements of US policy). Are you confusing policy with law? 
> 
> 2. If ICANN is incorporated under any other nation's laws, including Switzerland's, is it not also subject to a specific state's laws?  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of parminder [parminder at itforchange.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 11:56 PM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance
> 
> 
> On Saturday 30 November 2013 10:19 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>> yes Milton it will make it  the FIFA of IG world
>> 
>> Rafik 
> 
> Rafik, do you in that case agree that ICANN should remain an US organisation, subject solely to US laws... parminder 
> 
>> 
>> 2013/11/30 Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
>> No, no, no, please. That level of specificity is counterproductive at this stage. Many people who have studied this issue believe that turning ICANN into an INGO is the surest way for it to escape what little accountability it currently has. Those willing to go along with a general call for reform in ICANN’s US-centered oversight need not commit themselves to a particular solution at this point, and the language below does that.
>> 
>>  
>> Please don’t come up with off the cuff quickie solutions for this. It will take more than a scan of Wikipedia to solve.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] 
>> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 7:49 PM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google'
>> Cc: 'Norbert Bollow'; Milton L Mueller
>> Subject: RE: [governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance
>> 
>>  
>> What about
>> 
>>  
>> 1)      Transitioning ICANN and IANA to an International Non-Governmental Organization (INGO) status: The Global Meeting should aim at developing a suitable and widely acceptable means to achieve the desired transition of ICANN and IANA away from its links to the USG and
>> 
>>  
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_nongovernmental_organization
>> 
>>  
>> M
>> 
>>  
>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
>> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 2:39 PM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Cc: Norbert Bollow; Milton L Mueller
>> Subject: Re: [governance] DMP} Statement on Process and Objectives for the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance
>> 
>>  
>> ICANN (and its President/CEO) have been "encouraged" at several opportunities to adjust its "internationalization" rhetoric/terminology and thus its resulting INTERNATIONALIZATION thrust to one which is significantly more embrasive of the objectives of, and indeed, spirit of what GLOBALIZATION in theory, intends to achieve.
>> 
>> I believe therefore that Milton's recommendation is timely and appropriate ... whether we use the term "Globalization" or a perhaps more compromising and less economics/free-market linked phrase or term such as "Global Integration", or more radically, "Glocalization".
>> 
>> ------
>> Rgds,
>> 
>> Tracy
>> 
>>    
>> On Nov 29, 2013 4:52 PM, "Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal" <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Norbert, Dear Milton,
>> 
>>  
>> If I may contribute, with a somehow different and unusual perspective, and in my humble Global Governance observer capacity,  for the pleasure of the reflection:
>> 
>>  
>> Internationalization: one wants to have a larger international basis: more offices, more representatives, more of a network of local branches that, being put together, creates an international network. Still each element is mostly comparable to the starting point in terms of culture, thinking... Clones spread around the world? 'One for all' kind of uniformity. Meaning many little ICANNs all around. 
>> 
>>  
>> Globalization: this could happen without a network of offices around the world. You can observe a very globalized entity containing so many different elements, co-exisiting, still assembling one strong outlet with a governance of its own, but embracing 'solutions' that could fit more than one single corporation, institution, nation. One voice, many voices... in a single global body. So one ICANN speaking from one point to the many in a global manner of thinking. 
>> 
>> Meaning one ICANN with a big global mind.
>> 
>>  
>> Transnationalization: this tends to establish a community of people based in various locations, trying to forget about their local identity, interest or belonging, with the objective to address a more common, regional, transnational, trans-sectorial issue. A way to achieve an understanding of global magnitude. 
>> 
>> Meaning one ICANN talking to other minds.
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> - The first option has a few advantages. You keep a greater control over the network, and at the end of the day, you can pretend to be a global minded outlet. Good communication value.
>> 
>> - The second option is probably the most difficult to achieve, specially if you are not starting from a fully independent culture. Very challenging when one starts from a private or national basis.
>> 
>> - The third option might be a good compromise, if each one puts trust in the other minds ('nods'?). But maybe a more sustainable approach, and ultimately, one that could deliver a true global minded system.
>> 
>>  
>> Obviously, very much to be criticized, but at least worth trying to explore. And quiet appropriate with the current state of the IG debate.
>> 
>>  
>> Semantic has a lasting effect over the narrative and the ultimate objective. A little bit like 'multistakeholder' which has emerged from the corporate jargon (to soften counter forces or opponents, executives would convene 'stakeholders' to the table for consultation (trade union, politician...). A pure communication tool. Plus, it has a very poor stable definition and understanding, and an even looser legal impact. Something that usually brings a lot of misunderstandings, deadlocks...
>> 
>>  
>> All the best,
>> 
>> __________________________
>> 
>> Jean-Christophe Nothias 
>> Editor in Chief
>> jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net
>> 
>> @jc_nothias
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Le 29 nov. 2013 à 20:52, Norbert Bollow a écrit :
>> 
>>  
>> Am Fri, 29 Nov 2013 19:28:57 +0000
>> schrieb Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:
>> 
>> 
>> Recognizing that this is a late intervention (Thursday a big family
>> 
>> holiday in the US), is it possible to replace the word
>> 
>> "internationalization" with "globalization"? Increasingly we live in
>> 
>> a world where nations, and by extension the "inter-national" is not
>> 
>> an adequate term to define transborder, global phenomena
>> 
>> 
>> That's IMO a very valid point. Even though nation states and their
>> governments of course continue to have a significant role, it has
>> certainly become inadequate to try to understand transborder, global
>> phenomena by the method (that was helpful in earlier times) of
>> decomposing into what is happening at the national level plus what is
>> happening in inter-national trade and other areas of inter-national
>> relations.
>> 
>> On the other hand, many civil society people including myself are very
>> wary of the term "globalization", as globalization has often increased
>> social injustices while doing nothing to resolve the kinds of concerns
>> that the further "internationalization" of ICANN is intended to address.
>> 
>> Maybe yet another term could be used???
>> 
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131201/303d5d4a/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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