[ALAC] [NA-Discuss] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy & CommerceCommittee

Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
Wed Dec 14 20:01:00 UTC 2011


I absolutely agree with Jean Jacques.

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:42 AM, JJS <jjs.global at gmail.com> wrote:

> *Congratulations, Olivier & Beau, on a timely initiative. The remark on
> Esther's presentation set things straight.*
> *
> *
> *I would like to offer a general remark, which may be worth adapting for
> future public messages (never mind the wording, I'm suggesting a notion,
> not a draft): *
> *
> *
> *While recognizing the historic role played by the United States of America
> in the construction of the Internet, we note that its pertinence in the
> future depends on its ability to serve and protect the general user
> anywhere in the world. So, whereas we follow with great attention hearings
> in the two legislative houses in Washington, it is the duty of the ICANN,
> and of the ALAC, to impress upon legislators and the executive branch in
> all countries that the touchstone of future Internet development is and
> should remain the public interest. In parallel, we wish to draw the
> attention of legislators in the USA to the fact that, because their
> conclusions and choices regarding the Internet have the potential to affect
> users elsewhere, US initiatives and laws should seek to be compatible with
> the public interest internationally.*
> *
> *
> *Regards,*
> *Jean-Jacques.
> *
> 2011/12/15 Beau Brendler <beaubrendler at earthlink.net>
>
> > That's the Mexico City statement? Might not be a bad idea. Oliver and
> > Heidi are really the ones who have done the heavy lifting here, and I
> know
> > time is of the essence, so I leave it to them as to whether a reference
> of
> > this sort can be included
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > >From: "Garth Bruen at Knujon.com" <gbruen at knujon.com>
> > >Sent: Dec 14, 2011 12:20 PM
> > >To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>,
> > na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org, ALAC Working List <
> > alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> > >Cc: ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>, Beau Brendler <
> > beaubrendler at earthlink.net>
> > >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy &
> > CommerceCommittee
> > >
> > >Thanks. I'm concerned that this does not specifically reference ALAC's
> > >statement on the program which is the subject of the hearings.
> > >
> > >The letter might lead with "At-Large did not (was not asked/invited?) to
> > >testify, and was not referenced by Pritz in the list of constituent
> groups
> > >who contribute to ICANN consensus. However, our previous current stand
> on
> > >the new gTLD program is/can be found..."
> > >
> > >Comments about Dyson's statements are important to correct the record,
> but
> > >the message should be on point with the subject matter.
> > >
> > >--------------------------------------------------
> > >From: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com>
> > >Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 12:00 PM
> > >To: <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; "ALAC Working List"
> > ><alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> > >Cc: "ICANN AtLarge Staff" <staff at atlarge.icann.org>
> > >Subject: [NA-Discuss] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy &
> > >CommerceCommittee
> > >
> > >> Dear all,
> > >>
> > >> there has recently been discussion on the NARALO list, regarding
> > >> hearings taking place in the US, including a hearing by the Senate
> > >> Committee on Science, Energy & Transportation (held Dec 8) and a
> hearing
> > >> by the House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee (held on
> Dec
> > >> 14th -- i.e. today).
> > >> Evan has kindly explained what these are and how they can accept
> > >> comments, with clear links to the hearings. His message is included
> > below.
> > >>
> > >> Please find enclosed, a draft of the first letter from Beau Brendler,
> > >> NARALO Chair and co-signed by me, Chair of the ALAC, to be sent to the
> > >> Senate Committee by closing of business day today. It will be sent via
> > >> two paths, to the Chair of the Committee, John D. (Jay) Rockefeller.
> > >>
> > >> Since this draft letter is not a policy paper or ALAC Statement but
> > >> rather a letter to tell the Senate "you wish to see end user input in
> > >> ICANN, hey look, here we are", it does not require a formal vote, but
> it
> > >> will be archived in our ALAC correspondence.
> > >>
> > >> We shall also submit a similar letter to Chair of the the House of
> > >> Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee, Congressman Fred Upton,
> > >> should this be required. I understand that Kurt Pritz will be one of
> the
> > >> witnesses providing testimony in the hearing, so we'll have to see
> what
> > >> gets addressed at the hearing and if a completion of information is
> > >> required, no doubt that Beau and I would be happy to oblige.
> > >>
> > >> Kind regards,
> > >>
> > >> Olivier
> > >>
> > >> On 13/12/2011 06:49, Evan Leibovitch wrote :
> > >>> An important point of clarification (brought to me by Amber Sterling
> > >>> of the NPOC earlier today) about the deadlines.
> > >>>
> > >>> There are two different hearings
> > >>>
> > >>>  1. Senate Committee on Science Energy and Transportation
> > >>>     <http://1.usa.gov/vzddPH> (held Dec 8)
> > >>>     After the verbal testimony was given, the public is able to send
> > >>>     comments to the Committee by EoB Dec 14
> > >>>
> > >>>  2. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee
> > >>>
> > >>> <
> > http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearings/hearingdetail.aspx?NewsID=9134>
> > >>>     (to be held Dec 14)
> > >>>     After the verbal testimony is given, the public will be able to
> > >>>     send comments (deadline will be announced at the meeting)
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So... the letter Olivier has drafted is in response to the Senate
> > >>> hearing (chair: John Rockefeller) and needs to be sent there before
> > >>> Wednesday EoB. The letter mentions Esther Dyson, who participated in
> > >>> the Senate hearing last week but will *not* be at the House hearing
> > >>> this Wednesday.
> > >>>
> > >>> We may choose to send another, similar  letter to the House committee
> > >>> after its testimony is heard. But the one Olivier drafted (the
> content
> > >>> of which I agree with) needs to go to Mr. Rockefeller and the Senate
> > >>> committee.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki:
> >
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851


More information about the ALAC mailing list