[NCUC-DISCUSS] Expanding Scope of ICANN
Marc Perkel
marc at churchofreality.org
Mon Oct 28 18:39:52 CET 2013
I'm not a lawyer but I have extensive legal experience. You can't sue
the USG because they claim State Secrets Immunity and the judge
dismisses the case. I have been in court and watch it happen as the EFF
tried to do just that.
On 10/28/2013 10:32 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>
> I'm not a lawyer and qualified to judge if it is illegal or not, are
> you ? If so, just sue the USG.
>
> -J
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Marc Perkel
> <marc at churchofreality.org <mailto:marc at churchofreality.org>> wrote:
>
> What the USG is doing is highly illegal. However because the
> president and congress choose to ignore the constitution they can
> get away with it. And we have no right to inflict ourselves on the
> rest of the world.
>
>
> On 10/28/2013 10:18 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>>
>> The NSA is a product of the USG, the officials of the USG gave
>> the NSA the mandate and funding to do what they have been doing
>> for ages, I hardly believe that ICANN is even close to be the
>> right organization to tackle that issue.
>>
>> If you are a US Citizen, call your Senators/Representatives and
>> express your opinion, and put pressure on the big pockets that
>> fund the lobbying apparatus in Washington DC so they change the
>> agenda accordingly.
>>
>> Protocol Names and Numbers have NOTHING to do with the NSA, so it
>> is not in the scope of ICANN to fix ANYTHING related to it.
>>
>> -J
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Marc Perkel
>> <marc at churchofreality.org <mailto:marc at churchofreality.org>> wrote:
>>
>> I think ICANN needs to increase its scope. I think ICANN
>> needs to become a UN alternative forum to fill a vacuum to
>> address issues like the NSA spying. If ICANN doesn't do it -
>> who will?
>>
>>
>> On 10/27/2013 11:01 PM, Dan Krimm wrote:
>>
>> To the extent that Fadi is trying to address Internet
>> Governance generally
>> (forgive me if I am reading too much into his actions?),
>> that would seem to
>> be out of scope, regardless of whether ICANN/IANA and
>> general-IG both would
>> benefit from internationalization.
>>
>> As for multistakeholderism, in principle this all sounds
>> great, but in
>> practice it seems to have fallen far short of its
>> intended potential. In
>> practice is where the rubber hits the road, and in
>> practice MSism at ICANN
>> has recently fallen prey to ad hoc action when some "more
>> equal than
>> others" stakeholders decide the outcome is not to their
>> liking. They
>> apparently start to think along the lines of "God is not
>> Mocked."
>>
>> I see MSism as still an experimental work-in-progress,
>> hardly with all the
>> bugs worked out, and not necessarily "ready for prime
>> time" in terms of
>> overall world governance. The only reason it has worked
>> as free from
>> collapse at ICANN as it has up to now, I think, is that
>> the big Powers That
>> Be in the world (nations and big corporations) hadn't
>> really seen ICANN as
>> all that meaningful in their general scheme of things.
>> The more important
>> ICANN's actions become, the more the big powers will
>> pound on it to shape
>> it to their desires. I think you've only seen the bare
>> beginning of this
>> in the ad hoc shenanigans of the last few years. Just
>> beginning to rev up
>> the engines. MSism has not reached up out of the
>> play-pen to play with the
>> Big Boys yet, as far as I can tell, and it remains to be
>> seen how it will
>> fare if it is brought up to the Big Time.
>>
>> That's a big risk, IMHO. Be careful what you ask for,
>> you might get it.
>> And if it doesn't turn out how you expected, what then?
>> This whole MSism
>> experiment is a huge exercise in unintended consequences
>> (in the gap
>> between theory and practice), if you ask me. It's worth
>> doing the
>> experiment, but I'd be more comfortable if the experiment
>> were closer to
>> completion before trying it out on anything *really*
>> important. I don't
>> see it anywhere near that point, yet.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> --
>> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the
>> author alone and do
>> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's
>> employer.
>>
>>
>>
>> At 12:59 AM -0400 10/28/13, avri doria wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In terms of legitimacy, isn't one of the topics that
>> needs to be explored
>> internationalisation of ICANN, and IANA? Isn't that a
>> topic at the top of
>> the list? That seems to be in scope.
>>
>> And the ICANN Board seems to be on-board as Fadi was
>> meeting with a subset
>> of them (including the Chair) and AC/SO leadership
>> every morning. I wasn't
>> in the meetings, and don't know who the rep from gnso
>> was since Jonathan
>> wasn't there, so don't know what the level of buy in
>> was, but I heard no
>> complaints on the ground.
>>
>> So whatever we might say about scope creep Fadi is
>> not being renegade.
>>
>> As for scope creep Fadi and the leaders of the other
>> I* seem to be acting
>> in coordinated faction, so it is within their scope,
>> and would seem to be
>> in scope for any one of them to act on I*'s behalf in
>> organizational
>> talks with governments on a meeting planning.
>>
>> So, in this case at least, I see no fundamental
>> problem of overreach by
>> Fadi. And, whether he fully understand what it
>> means, he seems to be
>> carrying the banner of multistakeholderism into these
>> discussions.
>>
>> So, at least this once, I am not ready to join in
>> Fadi-attack.
>>
>>
>> avri
>>
>> Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20131028/711356aa/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list