I’ve only been to a couple of ICANN meetings and mostly participated in the ccNSO. I realize that the big picture issues rarely get discussed but that is part
of the problem. These types of discussions must happen in public. A first step to doing that is someone bringing up the big picture issues in a public forum. Most likely nothing will come of it when this happens. Most likely nothing will come of it the next
few times the same issue comes up. Once the door is open though, people start thinking about it, eventually it is OK to talk about it, and something gets done. I think asking the question in a non-confrontational way and accepting whatever answer we get is
a good first step in opening up this issue to be talked about elsewhere.
As an aside I will be at the Costa Rica meeting and would like to observe this particular meeting. I would like to get more involved with ICANN beyond the ccNSO.
Is the public allowed to observe?
Kerry Brown
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: February-22-12 4:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Confirming Meeting with the Board - Tuesday 13 March - 3:30pm
It will be interesting to see how Steve (Crocker) manages these meetings. In the past, the Board has seemed disinterested in discussing some of these "big
picture" (politically-charged?) issues, and has preferred more focused discussions on substantive policy topics. They have also tended to leave it to the SG to lead the discussion, which means that it's not enough to simply frame a question or issue; we'll
need to have a short description or list of bullet points we want to zoom in on within that question or issue.
For this topic, I think the chance of having a decent to good discussion will be enhanced if we are able to frame the question appropriately, and give perhaps
a paragraph or short set of bullet points on specific sub-questions members are interested in getting the Board's view on. Even so, be prepared for a bunch of comments like "we're not speaking on behalf of ICANN as this is not something the Board has taken
an official position on".
Cheers
Mary
Mary W S Wong
Professor of Law
Chair, Graduate IP Programs
Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP
>>>
That might be a more politically correct way to ask the question. I don’t know what the answer is or should be. I just know that ICANN needs to start talking
about the subject instead of dancing around it. If we ignore the perception that the US controls the Internet someone else will use that point to forcibly take control and ICANN will have no input into how it is done. The subject needs to see the light of
day. It is not going away no matter how much we wish it would. Kerry Brown From: Nicolas Adam
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
IMO, yes ICANN need to take its distance from US jurisdiction. But an inter-national jurisdiction is not a good idea. One question I’d like to see is: “Are there any plans to make ICANN more of an international organisation that is not beholden to or restricted by the laws
of any one country?” Your proposed topic possibly hints at this. Why not just come out and ask it so it is on the table for discussion. I don’t really expect we’d get a serious or full answer but it would get the subject out there. If ICANN doesn’t start planning
to make a move toward being a truly international organisation it will happen in an unplanned, possibly very destructive way whether we like it or not. It’s something we all need to start talking about. Kerry Brown From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Robin Gross NCSG has the opportunity to meet with the ICANN Board of Directors in Costa Rica. We need to identify the 3 topics / questions that we are most interested in discussing with the Board during our hour with them. One possible topic I'd like to suggest is ICANN's importance in defending the multi-stakeholder model of governance. We've seen a lot of pressure from governments recently to exert more control on the Internet and on ICANN policymaking
activities. It might be good to reiterate to the board that we support multi-stakeholderism in which civil society is an equal participant to business and government in policymaking and that ICANN can lead to defend this private-sector led governance model. What do others think? We should come up a top 3 list to propose to the board by 2 March. Thank you, Robin Begin forwarded message:
From:
Diane Schroeder <[log in to unmask]> Date:
February 22, 2012 12:27:58 PM PST To:
Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> Cc:
Glen de Saint Géry <[log in to unmask]>, David Olive <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Confirming Meeting with the Board - Tuesday 13 March - 3:30pm Dear Robin - this will confirm that the Board will be meeting with the Noncommercial Stakeholder Group on Tuesday 13 March from 3:30pm to 4:30pm. The arrangements will
be similar to those in Dakar – there will be a head table and class room style with additional chair seating. Interpretation and scribing will be provided for the meeting. It would be helpful if the Stakeholder Group could identify the three topics/questions that they are most interested in discussing with the Board and sending those to me
by Friday 2 March. I will endeavor to the same on behalf of the Board. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Diane Schroeder Director of Board Support ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Ste. 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 +1-310-823-9358 (main) +1-310-301-5827 (direct) +1-310-823-8649 (fax) +1-562-644-2524 (mobile) |