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

gbruen at knujon.com gbruen at knujon.com
Wed Dec 14 20:11:13 UTC 2011


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: JJS <jjs.global at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 03:42:46 
To: Beau Brendler<beaubrendler at earthlink.net>
Cc: Garth Bruen at Knujon.com<gbruen at knujon.com>; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond<ocl at gih.com>; <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; ALAC Working List<alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; ICANN AtLarge Staff<staff at atlarge.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [ALAC] [NA-Discuss] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy & CommerceCommittee

*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.*
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)

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list