<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
I agree with Milton's analysis and suggestion that those concerned about ICANN accountability should comment on this issue and urge ICANN to accept the <a href="http://bit.ly/bSvfBT">decision</a> of the Independent Review Panel. I plan to.<div><br></div><div>ICANN has a bad habit of calling for a "do-over" (Yet Another Process, or YAP) when decisions are taken that ICANN doesn't really want to implement. Rather than re-create YAP to reach a different result, one desired by the "more-equal members of the community", ICANN should follow the existing process and uphold its obligations to those who try to play by its rules.</div><div><br></div><div>The <a href="http://bit.ly/bSvfBT">Independent Review Panel decision</a> is very clear in its finding that ICANN has to follow rules like everyone else, and it failed to in this instance, and that the proper remedy is for the Board to reverse its earlier decision and mishandling of the .XXX domain. This would demonstrate ICANN is capable of growth and accountability by accepting some measure of independent over-sight on its previously mistaken decisions.<br><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Robin<br><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Mar 28, 2010, at 9:46 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="Section1"><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; ">In a bad development, ICANN’s lawyers are attempting to brush aside its only real external accountability mechanism, the Independent Review Process (IRP). As you know, ICANN lost its IRP challenge on the .xxx top level domain.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; ">Instead of accepting this decision and conforming to it, ICANN is asking for public comment on whether it should accept the decision (simple answer: YES); it is also suggesting that the applicant would have to go through an entirely new “review process” to get the domain that was unfairly denied it five years ago. The proposed process for the “review” looks like it was designed by a crazy man – there is a clear attempt here to deny justice through perpetual process cycling.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; ">The comment period on this travesty is now open: <a href="http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-26mar10-en.htm</a><o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; ">I urge all NCSC members to comment along the following lines:<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span style="font-family: Symbol; "><span>·<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span></span>ICANN must respect the decision of the IRP panel.<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span style="font-family: Symbol; "><span>·<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span></span>ICANN has no justification for starting a de novo review process when its review panel has already decided that it acted in an unfair and discriminatory manner. To do so is to prolong the injustice.<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0.5in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Courier New'; text-indent: -0.25in; "><span style="font-family: Symbol; "><span>·<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman'; "> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span></span>ICANN has no business asking the GAC – or any other Advisory Committee – for political advice, it simply needs to conform to the IRP decision<o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; ">Please don’t allow ICANN to pretend that the public doesn’t want it to be accountable. Comment on this proposal!<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; ">--MM<o:p></o:p></span></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; "><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div>IP JUSTICE</div><div>Robin Gross, Executive Director</div><div>1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA</div><div>p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451</div><div>w: <a href="http://www.ipjustice.org">http://www.ipjustice.org</a> e: <a href="mailto:robin@ipjustice.org">robin@ipjustice.org</a></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"> </div><br></div></div></div></body></html>