[At-Large] [BMSPC-2020] Board seat 15 selection

Fri Nov 22 01:37:03 UTC 2019

Jonathan,

Let's stay on track.  There is no need to disparage the perspectives of
thousands of members of the public, who on their own initiative submitted
comments on the .org agreement.  The attempt to delegitimize those comments
as less than genuine has been thoroughly discredited, as detailed in this
letter to the Ombudsman (
https://www.internetcommerce.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Letter-to-ICANN-Ombudsman-September-12-2019.pdf
).

The comments that ICANN received ranged from well-established non-profits
such as NPR, AARP, the National Council of Nonprofits and the ASAE, as well
as much smaller nonprofits and individuals.  You can read a selection of
the more notable public comments here:
https://www.internetcommerce.org/selected-public-comments-submitted-in-response-to-the-proposed-renewal-of-the-org-registry-agreement/
.

ICANN would have been much better off if it had listened to this feedback
rather than discrediting it, for we would then not be in the mess we are in
now.

Regards,

Nat Cohen
Director, Internet Commerce Association

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:08 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
wrote:

> Exactly! In a world where the domainers can gin up 3k ridiculous comments,
> activation needs to be a priority for the At-Large!
>
> Jonathan Zuck
> Executive Director
> Innovators Network Foundation
> www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* At-Large <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of
> Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:55:57 PM
> *To:* Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com>
> *Cc:* At-Large Worldwide <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [At-Large] [BMSPC-2020] Board seat 15 selection
>
> +1 I agree with you Karl. At-Large had got to  change its approach if we
> are to "draw ICANN" differently and I think that is what Brian has been
> attempting to do.
>
> I would like to hope that we in At-Large are on the way towards creating
> change through everyone talking rationally to each other, sharing their
> perspectives and moving each other more purposefully in a more focused
> direction,  stumbling forward (as Wolfgang suggests) together as a
> collective.
>
> Theoretically, as end-users, our numbers should be our strength, but 200
> odd ALSes and a few hundred individual users who are not yet engaged with
> what ICANN does nor are they actively part of it, are not going to get us
> very far..
>
> Maureen
>
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2019, 10:14 AM Karl Auerbach, <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/21/19 10:25 AM, Christian wrote:
>
> Domain name registration via ICANN structures is not a public interest
> activity but a business with some strong cartel like features.
>
> That is true.
>
> In my own life I wear several hats - I am (obviously) a very pro-democracy
> advocate.  But I am also an intellectual property lawyer.  I also own and
> operate multiple businesses (via corporate forms), most of which have
> domain name and trademarks.  I also am a net techie (and have my name on
> full Internet Standard RFCs.)  I also have a financial interest in various
> domain name registries.
>
> In terms of power (by which I mean power to influence ICANN decisions) the
> least powerful of my hats is that of the individual here in ICANN.
>
> I spent last week among my intellectual property lawyer peers.  Those
> folks represent a seriously strong power block.  When they (or, rather, we)
> are figuring out how to make ICANN dance to our tune we can afford to
> dedicate serious resources, such as full time staff, to make sure we have
> the best chance of winning.  The public, the ALAC, the individual has
> nearly zero chance of winning.  Just witness how easily the intellectual
> property interests got the highly biased UDRP into place and how far ICANN
> policy over the ensuing decades has been shaped to cater to the interests
> of my friends in the intellectual property community.
>
> Same thing in my roles with my corporations and registry interests:
> Although not as well organized as the intellectual property industry, my
> business and registry friends are quite able and willing to expend
> resources (and hire dedicated staff) to ensure that their (our) interests
> are strongly expressed within ICANN.
>
> It is hard for individuals, hobbled by ICANN's Byzantine procedures,
> bureaucracy, layers ALAC "organizations", and a mere single public board
> seat,  to carry the day against well organized and well funded industrial
> opposition.
>
> And ICANN's fundamental structure not only allows, but encourages, this
> kind of industrial collaboration and combination of influence.
>
> The notion of "stakeholder" says that our voice within ICANN is measured
> by our self-interest, largely our financial self-interest, in maters before
> ICANN.   Because individuals - you and me - have a dilute interest, and
> often not an interest easily measured in financial terms, our authority
> within ICANN as stakeholders is written in lower case.  On the other hand,
> because Intellectual Property, business, registrar, and registry interests
> are organized and combined and have a high dollar value their role as
> STAKEHOLDERS in ICANN is written in upper case, in bold font, italicized,
> and underlined.
>
> It is no wonder, therefore, that the "non-profit/public benefit"
> corporation called ICANN has been captured by industrial interests, dances
> to their tunes, and allows sales of "Public Interest Registry" to a body of
> ICANN insiders with nary a shred of concern about the public or its
> interests.
>
> One might apply Jessica Rabbit's famous line to ICANN: "I'm not bad, I'm
> just drawn that way."
>
> ICANN will continue to favor organized business interests over the public
> benefit as long as ICANN retains its present form.
>
> If we want to make ICANN less bad then we will have to draw it a different
> way.
>
>         --karl--
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20191121/9c6aacef/attachment-0001.html>