On Aug 13, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh@cis-india.org> wrote:
John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org> [2016-08-08 06:56:12 -0400]:
ICANN by its function is not a "public governance body” - it is actually a coordination body that supports the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s various identifier systems.
Dear John, It is not a mere "coordination body". It sets policies, which a "coordination body" would not do.
Incorrect. There are coordination bodies for a wide range of activities that also set policies, standards, and charge fees. Some examples include technical standards/coordination bodies for Bluetooth, USB, data center/open interconnection standards, etc. The coordination of Internet identifiers (like domain names) may be a much more visible activity to the public, but that does not change the inherent nature of the function - it is about coordination of a reliable and secure system of unique identifiers, not about governing anyone or anything. You are not governed by your use of USB connector, but benefit from the coordination which underlies same.
Setting down policies with regard to trademarks and domain names, for instance, is not mere "coordination", imho.
Yes, you have made plain your opinion already.
It is a regulator: it taxes, it regulates, and it engages in governance.[1]
Whereas I would say it is a coordination body - one which sets policies and charges various fees related to Internet identifiers. The bylaws and articles of incorporation would also suggest a similar characterization of ICANN (to the extent that you consider them at all germane to the discussion...) /John Disclaimer: my views alone.