[NA-Discuss] FTC letter on new gTLDs

[Avri Doria]

On 19 Dec 2011, at 15:01, Eduardo Diaz wrote:

> As far as I know, US owns IANA therefore they own the Internet. So even though they may not have any authority over the ICANN multistakeholder process in the end it boils down to who owns it. Don't you think?

No I don't.  The instant the US tries to control it a suzerain  it will inspire several different movements, includoing:
 
- a departure from the single source on names controlled by IANA
- a departure from control by a US incorporated organization.

Much of the world is watching and is not friendly to the idea of the US pulling the strings.  The second that ICANN starts allowing itself to be jerked around by US agencies whose strings are controlled by big US money, is the beginning of the end.

That is what I think.

As with any new stakeholder looking to get involved in the process, they should join the appropriate group, in this case as an observer in GAC for the IGOs and as a member of the US delegation for the FTC.

These new stakeholders have been represented by the GAC for a long time.  And the GAC has been involved in the process from the start, having slowed it down by a good part of year already, having been included in the process from the very start by the presence of the liaison it then had with the GNSO.  Yes new stakeholders are finally discovering ICANN, but we cannot reopen every subject every time some new agency is convinced by monied classes that they must get involved - and don't doubt for a second that these US agencies now getting involved are doing so at the behest of their financial "motivators" in the US.


avri



> 
> -ed
> 
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Why is that a US FTC Commission must be listened to?
> Responded to, yes, but listened to, as in obey?  Why?
> 
> What authority does they have over the ICANN multistakeholder process?
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 19 Dec 2011, at 12:19, Beau Brendler wrote:
> 
> > Just wanted to make sure everyone saw, and read, this letter on the new gTLD program sent by the FTC to ICANN on the 16th. It's a stinging letter and contains a number of elements that several of us have been saying for years. It also infers that ICANN is corrupted by contracted parties. For me -- I know you don't all share my views -- I feel somewhat vindicated that some entity that actually will have to be listened to, is finally saying these things:
> >
> > http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/publicltrs/111216letter-to-icann.pdf
> >
> >
> >
> > ------
> > NA-Discuss mailing list
> > NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> >
> > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > ------
> >
> 
> 
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> 
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communication by error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.