[governance] Does it matter which legal system ICANN operates under?

[parminder]

Kerry

Lets agree to you contention - it does not matter 'which legal system 
ICANN operates under" (although I think it does).

Now, if this is so, it should be ideal that ICANN operates under an 
international legal system, under UN auspice, rather than of one 
country... Just looks and feels nicer, fairer, democratic etc etc. No? 
Even if just for its symbolic value - and you know, in politics symbolic 
values count for a lot.

However, moment you propose that, there are shrill cries all over - UN 
out to control the Internet. Now, how does the logic you propose 
suddenly change completely when it is the UN/ international legal regime 
instead of US... That is the paradox. And I will be happy to hear your 
response to it.

So, the simple question is this: How when US exercises oversight over 
the ICANN, it is contended that the 'oversight' issue bears, or can 
bear, no connection to content, and other control related issues, 
whatsoever; but when it is proposed that an international/ UN body takes 
up oversight of ICANN, these issues suddenly become the most relevant ones??

parminder



On Tuesday 11 June 2013 09:42 PM, Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> The subject line will probably stir some controversy. Because of that 
> I will state my position clearly so people don’t misunderstand where 
> I’m coming from. I abhor the Patriot Act. I abhor governments secretly 
> collecting data with no oversight. I abhor how the Patriot Act has 
> affected my country which is Canada. Because of the Patriot Act I am 
> actively supporting the establishment of more IXPs in Canada to help 
> keep Canadian data in Canada. I actively lobby my government to be 
> more open and transparent.
>
> Now to the question I posed. Are we not conflating two issues that are 
> not related? Solving one won’t change the other. If ICANN moved to a 
> different jurisdiction tomorrow what would change re the American 
> government’s access to private data? Many of the services that 
> Internet users worldwide want to access are provided by American based 
> companies subject to American law. Much of the world’s Internet 
> traffic is carried on communications media owned by American companies 
> subject to American law. How would changing the jurisdiction that 
> ICANN operates under change the reality that if the American 
> government wants to spy on anybody they could do so with relative ease?
>
> I am all for investigating what it would take to move ICANN away from 
> US jurisdiction. There are many questions that need to be answered and 
> problems that would need to be solved but in the end I believe it 
> would be a good thing. I fail to see however that it would in any way 
> hinder the US governments’ ability to collect data from the Internet. 
> These are two distinct issues that will require different solutions.
>
> Kerry Brown
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130612/65ecb810/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