Dear Phillipp, I am sorry, I had planned to write to you much earlier. Thanks for your mail – I had also read your statement before the first round of the election, and I had intended to write at that time, because of what you said about fairness. This is, of course a very wide field. I would like to introduce myself a little bit more – though we met often over the years, I am not sure if I ever shared with you where I came from when going to an ICANN meeting. I started the first connection to the Internet from Cambodia in 1994 – from a dial-up system I created on a notebook, US$ 5.- per minute on a slow slow slow connection to San Francisco, and for three years I was the only provider in Cambodia, having about 1500 users by the time the first two big commercial ISPs were set up. - I am employed by a Cambodian NGO – the Open Forum of Cambodia – committed to facilitate and to foster communication in Cambodian society, not only by electronic means, though these were important to help break the decades of international isolation of the country – self imposed or enforced from the outside, as times changed. Having done some “pioneering” things in Cambodia, I was invited to join the non-commercial constituency of ICANN since 1999, and whenever I could find sponsorship I participated – later as an elected member of the Executive Committee of NCUC (and its predecessor) and from there sent into the GNSO Council. Considering your candidacy for the ICANN Board, I do not want to ask some of the standard policy questions, but I would rather like to ask to kindly send some comments back about an experience I had recently. If you find the time to respond, however briefly or more in detail, I would like to ask for your understanding that I would like to share your response with the members of the NCUC. My experience relates to one concern of the NCUC – how to maintain and possibly extend the field for open and unhindered communication. Many people living in more advanced economies think that communication is often in danger of being controlled politically (which can also happen); here it is restricted by our economic environment – a high-school teacher gets about US$ 35 a month (thirty five – I did not forget a zero). = I did participate in the two UN Summits for the Information Society, and also in some of the preparatory meetings for both. You know that they had been set up, by a resolution of the UN General Assembly, as “multi-stakeholder” processes: for governments, inter-governmental agencies, business, and civil society. During the last preparatory conference for WSIS 2 in Tunis, in Geneva in October 2005, there were many smaller working groups feeding into the plenaries, and one was on Cultural Identity, chaired by an ambassador from Egypt. After all the nice things were said which Geneva WSIS 2003 had beautifully formulated in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Principles, comments were invited about “success stories” - how this really works. I offered to speak, the chair recognized me, I identified myself with my background in an NGO, and then I shared what we are doing – after waiting in vain for years that the promises of a certain well known software company to make their OS and their main applications available in the Khmer language and script would come true. (I had been involved in finalizing the UNICODE standard for the Khmer script until mid 2002 – and since January 2003 we had to readjust our expectations to July, and then to the next year, and so on – until today: nothing.) So I shared that our organization had started to develop free Open Source software in the Cambodian language, based on the UNICODE standard – we have now a browser, a mailer, the whole Open Office 2.0 suite, and a number of utilities. As the name says: Open Source software allows access to the source, and therefore the process of “localization” - to change the user interface into another language, and to allow the system to handle a different script - is possible and legal. The National Information Technology Authority of the Cambodian government picked up our drive and is promoting it, the Ministry of Education got involved, ((by now we have trained 400 trainers)) and what we do is opening up the possibility for thousands of people who do not speak a foreign language to learn how to use a computer – and to use it at the place of work – in their own language, and without having to pay one full year's salary for the equipment of a computer with legal software according to the standard prices. While I spoke, a person in the room went up to the chair, I was asked to identify myself again. On the strong insistence of the intervener (I could not identify her institutionally, but I was told that this person was from the official US delegation), I was requested to leave the room - and I was told that my inference that Open Source software is more suited than commercial software for localization is wrong, discriminatory, and not acceptable. So much for the “level playing field” in overcoming the digital divide. The gap is at present actually not so big, as almost all software, whatever is on a disk, is freely available on CDs for US$2 a piece – but since Cambodia became a member of the WTO, there is a growing threat that “piracy” will not be tolerated in future. But if this should happen, probably computerization in the field of education will come to a grinding halt for economic reasons (unless Open Source software is made the regular choice in procurement). Pirates – as we know them from the movies – are prepared to kill to achieve their goals. We know about piracy not only from the movies, but it happens also occasionally that a small cargo ship from Singapore does no longer carry what they loaded before entering the Mekong River in Vietnam and come upstream to Cambodia. I cannot explain to Cambodian friends why it is compared to a crime of brutal violence, when knowledge is shared. I know all – OK, surely not all - the legal answers given by the IP and business representatives. I live and work with other people who do neither know much about these legalities, and who have difficulty to follow, when one explains. But they are more and more part of the same global information society, for which the WSIS meetings were held, and for which ICANN tries to provide a service in a limited field. I would appreciate some comments back which go beyond a narrowly defined ICANN mandate. Thanks for your attention – if you read through my somewhat lengthy letter. And see you in Marrakesh. Norbert