RE: [ALSC-Forum] sparse thoughts on options and issues

[Bruce Young]

Vittorio wrote:

>The Internet is for everyone. So everyone should get a voice in its
>management, independently from his social and economical position,
>geographical location, and technical skills.

Exactly right.  The decisions ICANN has to make may be technical, but they
have very deep social implications.  Often the technology chosen drives
these implications.  Techies often become so enthralled in the "coolness" of
new technology that they forget to consider the imact that technology might
have on others.  I feel it is wholly appropriate for non-technical persons
to vote on technological solutions based on the social implications of that
technology.

> . . . ICANN's need for worldwide legitimacy can be met by
>establishing a system through which all affected entities and individuals
of
>the world, including those without any technical skill, can have a voice in
>the decision-making process.

Right on, Brother!  :)  More to the point, this is the *only way* that
legitimacy can be gained.

>If ICANN fails in involving a huge number of individuals all over the world
>and giving them true power (not just "input" or "consultation" or a couple
>of seats in a board of 20, just to say they're there), it will just end up
>in being a private group of entities that try to establish a monopoly over
>the DNS management; it will be easy for governments to attack ICANN because
>t is too US-centric, or for new TLD proponents to attack ICANN because it
>limits the market competition without having any public authority to do so.

That is the fear, and the reason we have to be successful.

>If you have 1000 At Large
>members it is very easy for anyone to collect a significantly relevant list
>of "dummy members" and subscribe them. If you have a million of them, it is
>much more difficult. So ICANN should take a commitment to promote the
>membership, not to reduce it.

Good point!

>For the aforementioned reasons, you *need* to get as many members as
>possible, to make the thing work. This is why you really want not to have
>membership fees.

Exactly.  Even in the so-called "rich" countries of North America and Europe
there are people of limited (or no!) financial means.  Poor people, whether
in the US, Uzbekistan, or Uganda, deserve the right to vote on the future of
the internet.

>* Incompatibility

There are way to many schools of thought here.  Yours sounds fine on the
face of it.

>* Intermediate levels

This is necessary, but only in that interest groups of all types are going
to form: country or regeion-based, religious-based,

>For example, I've started following the .eu
>creation process - and many people there want to build a sort of European
At
>Large. But then, would I have to be part of ICANN At Large, .eu At Large,
>.it At Large, and perhaps .net At Large or .foo At Large?

I don't see a problem here.  As long as you, as Vittorio Bertola, only have
one vote in the ICANN At-Large, you should be able to join all the interest
groups you want.  For example, I can belong to the Disable American
Veterans, People for the American Way, and the Democratic Party, etc. Each
of these groups have their own agendas that they politick for, but come
election day I only have one vote!  ICANN can easily be set up the same, and
nothing should stop these groups and associations, formal or informal, from
attempting to influence At-Large voters.

>Let's say that, for example, ICANN, on behalf of the Internet community,
>decides to establish a .ngo domain for NGOs. Let's say that, for example, a
>NGO named "Foo" exists in any part of the world. Let's also say that "Foo"
>is a registered trademark in the US by Foo, Inc. How do you avoid that Foo,
>Inc. sues the Foo NGO for trademark infringement if they register foo.ngo?

As I've said here before, we should only allow trademark protection in a
handful of domains that are clearly commercial in nature (I vote for COM and
BIZ).  Then open the rest up first-com, first served!

>There must be a way to enforce a global anti-spam policy.

I'm not sure how you can enforce this.  Spoofing is just too easy.

Thanks for your thoughts Vittorio!

Bruce Young
Portland, Oregon
byoung651@home.com
http://members.home.net/byoung651/index.html