Fwd: Confirming Meeting with the Board - Tuesday 13 March - 3:30pm

[Nicolas Adam]

I agree with you Kerry that it has to be brought up. I've long thought 
that ICANN would be better off if it would dare populate the "delicate" 
issue of its foundation with its own assertions.

Its a recurring theme that threatens it and will continue to do so. I 
also think that SGs like ours are ideally positions to nudge the Board 
in this direction. The Board and NCSG are natural ally on this issue.

Nicolas

On 2/22/2012 8:03 PM, Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> 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:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf 
> Of *Mary.Wong at LAW.UNH.EDU
> *Sent:* February-22-12 4:42 PM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *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/
>
> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW
>
> Two White Street
>
> Concord, NH 03301
>
> USA
>
> Email: mary.wong at law.unh.edu <mailto:mary.wong at law.unh.edu>
>
> Phone: 1-603-513-5143
>
> Webpage: http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php
>
> Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network 
> (SSRN) at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>
> >>>
>
> *From: *
>
> 	
>
> Kerry Brown <kerry at KDBSYSTEMS.COM <mailto:kerry at KDBSYSTEMS.COM>>
>
> *To:*
>
> 	
>
> <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>>
>
> *Date: *
>
> 	
>
> 2/22/2012 7:17 PM
>
> *Subject: *
>
> 	
>
> Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Confirming Meeting with the Board - Tuesday 13 
> March - 3:30pm
>
> 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:nickolas.adam at gmail.com] 
> <mailto:[mailto:nickolas.adam at gmail.com]>
> *Sent:* February-22-12 4:06 PM
> *To:* Kerry Brown
> *Cc:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> *Subject:* Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Confirming Meeting with the Board - 
> Tuesday 13 March - 3:30pm
>
> IMO, yes ICANN need to take its distance from US jurisdiction. But an 
> inter-national jurisdiction is not a good idea.
>
> ICANN's legitimacy hinge on users (writ large, commercial and non, 
> contracted and non) and it should definitely stress its non 
> inter-national foundations, as well as its non-international plans for 
> the future, early and often.
>
> Asking the inter-national question just embarrass ICANN as an org, and 
> it doesn't help it strengthen its *global* foundation.
>
> May be I would ask if there are plans to address the perception that 
> US has final jurisdiction (implying it does not) in order to populate 
> the "authority/foundation by announcement" space in a manner that is 
> most conducive to ICANN's perrenity (as beholden to all its 
> stakeholders/communities)?
>
> Nicolas
>
> On 2/22/2012 4:39 PM, Kerry Brown wrote:
>
> 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:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf 
> Of *Robin Gross
> *Sent:* February-22-12 1:07 PM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> *Subject:* [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Confirming Meeting with the Board - 
> Tuesday 13 March - 3:30pm
>
> 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 <diane.schroeder at icann.org 
> <mailto:diane.schroeder at icann.org>>
>
> *Date: *February 22, 2012 12:27:58 PM PST
>
> *To: *Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org <mailto:robin at ipjustice.org>>
>
> *Cc: *Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org <mailto:Glen at icann.org>>, 
> David Olive <david.olive at icann.org <mailto:david.olive at icann.org>>
>
> *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)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20120222/f8ffc06d/attachment-0001.html>