[At-Large] [Secretariat] EURALO Board communiqué

Jonathan Zuck JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org
Thu Mar 3 04:16:18 UTC 2022

Single issue call tomorrow at 1900 UTC


Jonathan Zuck
Executive Director
Innovators Network Foundation
Main: +1 (202) 827-7594
Direct: +1 (202) 420-7483
From: At-Large <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Karl Auerbach via At-Large <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:44:06 PM
To: Amrita Choudhury <amritachoudhury at ccaoi.in>; 'Sebicann Bachollet' <sebicann at bachollet.fr>; 'ALAC' <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; 'RALO Leadership' <secretariat at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Cc: 'At Large' <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Secretariat] EURALO Board communiqué

On 3/2/22 3:33 AM, Amrita Choudhury via At-Large wrote:

Agree with the statement.

The situation in Ukraine is very unfortunate.

However, Internet should remain on, for all and ICANN services should remain neutral and apolitical.

To my mind remaining "neutral and apolitical" is neither of those things.

The Ukrainian military is using explosives to destroy its own roads and bridges to slow the invasion.  Yes, that does hinder civil society and resistance.  However, it is a choice that the Ukrainians themselves have made.

The internet is another kind of road that is carrying another kind of invasion.  Why should we hesitate to follow the Ukrainian's own example?

If we were entrusted with a drawbridge over a river and we see a caravan of Black Marias (unmarked vehicles sent by the Stalin/Beria's NKVD to secretly fetch people to the Gulag) approaching.  Would we say "Oh, my job is to promote the open flow of traffic, so I will not raise the bridge."  Our would we say "I must raise the drawbridge to block this abomination?"

If ICANN is silent than we ought not to be surprised if we subsequently are endowed with an ill reputation not unlike that of IBM resulting from its actions in Germany 1933 through 1945.

To my mind the question for ICANN is not whether to act.  Rather the question is how to act.  That act may be as simple as a statement articulating the balances to be made, the limits of ICANN's powers, etc.  Or it may be as complex as a temporary redelegation of .ru.

In these situations I look for guiding principles.  Among these are the desire to maintain internet connectivity for use by those opposing this invasion, the desire to not add further pressures that could induce future internet fragmentation, the limits of ICANN's contractual authority over these things, etc.

I also look to ICANN's position under the law as a "public benefit" corporation.  I, personally, do not see how silence regarding death of innocents and armed invasion benefits the public.

Murder ought never be answered with a dismissive "tut, tut, how unfortunate".


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20220303/bc289f65/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list