May 2011 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

ALAC statement on eG8
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 27, 2011

May 27, 2011

Dear members, a final version of the text which was originally drafted by Cintra Sooknanan, and supported by many, thus turning it into a proposed ALAC Statement on the eG8 Summit can be found on: https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/ALAC+Statement+on+the+eG8… The comment period for amendments to this text is now closed, but prior to sending it, I wanted to answer a few questions which I have received, and also asked myself over the week-end. - Who is this Statement going to be sent to? There have been several proposals. It is clear that writing a statement for the sake of writing a statement and not sending it to anyone, would be a waste of time. In order to have the widest dissemination, and after enquiring, copies of this statement in English and in French will go to the following: - The person in charge of electronic communication at the Elysée Palace (who are the organizers of the eG8) - The French GAC representatives - The ICANN Board - The ICANN CEO - Agence France Presse, Le Monde Newspaper, the eG8 Forum Organising Office (via an indirect vector) - Is this statement going to be ratified? Yes, this will be either ratified at the ALAC call on 24 May 2011 or in a 5-day vote after sending the statement out. We shall decide this as a group during the ALAC call. PLEASE READ IT BEFORE THE ALAC CALL ON 24 MAY 2011. - Why has this statement been drafted? The eG8 Forum is a direct result of the renewed interests that Governments have regarding the Internet. However, looking at the eG8 Forum Agenda ( http://www.eg8forum.com/en/documents/EG8_Program.pdf ), it is clear that the speaker list is far from reflecting the worldwide Internet community as it exists today. Indeed, the speaker list is a world away from being multi-stakeholder. Several members of At-Large have voiced their opinion that the ALAC should send a statement to complain to the organisers of the eG8 Forum. Many other organisations around the world have already also written emails, letter and petitions to complain about the lack of multi-stakeholder participation. Rather than signing another organisation's petition or public letter, it was decided to write our own, targeted statement. - Isn't this outside the ALAC's realm of activity? That's a good question. The current ICANN bylaws define the ALAC's function in Article XI, Section 2.4.a: "a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users." The eG8 conference organisers have sent invitations to attend the conference as a participant to several individuals at ICANN, including both ICANN's current CEO and Chairman. Clearly, ICANN's functions constitute an essential part of the Internet infrastructure. Yet, ICANN has not been given a speaking slot in a long line-up which is not short of private sector speakers: http://www.eg8forum.com/en/documents/EG8_Program.pdf As grassroots members of a bottom-up organisation, it is up to us, the Internet's users, to show our support of the ICANN multi-stakeholder model which affords us and all other stakeholders to have an equal input into the way the ICANN functions are developed. Our advice, as sent to the organisers of the eG8 conference, goes no further than supporting the multi-stakeholder model which is a core ICANN activity. This is a model that we need to defend through education and outreach. The statement is a clear attempt at doing just that. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

3 5

France Culture (French Radio) on the eG8 Forum
by Sébastien Bachollet May 25, 2011

May 25, 2011

http://www.franceculture.com/emission-l-invite-du-jour-l-invite-des-matins-2 011-05-25.html In French. Depuis hier se tient à Paris le premier G8 de lInternet. On attendait beaucoup de cette grande première, qui réunit plus de 1000 personnes, dont de grandes « stars » internationales de la Toile A lheure où Internet a montré, dans le monde arabe, à quel point notre monde bien réel devait compter désormais avec son monde virtuel, on pouvait sattendre à ce que le web soit consacré comme nouveau fer de lance de la démocratie. Pourtant le discours dinauguration prononcé hier par Nicolas Sarkozy, axé sur la régulation et le besoin dun internet plus « civilisé », a donné un autre ton à lévénement. Nous recevons ce matin pour en parler 2 cow-boys de ce Wild wild web qui inquiète notre président : Jean-Marc Manach, web journaliste spécialisé dans les questions liées à l'impact des technologies de l'information et d ela communication sur notre société et nos vies privées ; et Paul Jorion, docteur en sciences sociales de luniversité Libre de Bruxelles, professeur, écrivain et chroniqueur spécialiste de lintelligence artificielle, des sciences cognitives et de léconomie. Tous deux bloggeurs invétérés. Sébastien Bachollet <mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com> sebastien(a)bachollet.com Member of the ICANN Board Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/> http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mobile (France): +33 6 07 66 89 33 Skype: sebastien-bachollet Jabber: sbacholl(a)jabber.org

1 0

Fwd: ALAC Statement on the eG8 Forum
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 25, 2011

May 25, 2011

Dear all, please be so kind to find the message sent to ICANN Board & GAC leadership, along with the Statement which we have sent separately to the Elysée Palace and other organisations (Agence France Presse, etc.) via other channels, in English and in French. Please forward in your circles too! Thanks to all who have contributed to this statement. Warm regards, Olivier -------- Message original -------- Sujet: ALAC Statement on the eG8 Forum Date : Wed, 25 May 2011 01:58:02 +0200 De : Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> Pour : secretary(a)icann.org, Peter Dengate Thrush <peter.dengatethrush(a)icann.org>, Rod Beckstrom <rod.beckstrom(a)icann.org>, Jeremy Beale <jeremy.beale(a)gac.icann.org>, "Heather.Dryden Dryden" <Heather.Dryden(a)ic.gc.ca> Copie à : ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> Dear all, Please find enclosed, for your information, the public statement of the ALAC on the eG8 Forum, sent to the organisers of the Forum. After some discussion showing alarm in the At-Large community, Cintra Sooknanan, member of an At-Large Structure in the Latin American & Caribbean Regional At-Large Organisation (LACRALO) composed a first draft of this statement. The At-Large staff placed this statement on a wiki workspace <https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/ALAC+Statement+on+the+eG8…> and on 20 May 2011, circulated a call for comments to the At-Large community. Several comments were received, including a joint contribution (Cintra Sooknanan with Christopher Wilkinson, member of an At-Large Structure in the European Regional At-Large Organisation (EURALO)) to draft a second version of this document. On 24 May 2011, this version was presented to the ALAC during its monthly call. The statement was ratified by a unanimous vote, the call having achieved quorum. On 24 May 2011, the statement was translated into French, with the English version of the statement serving as the original, and was sent via several channels to: - the person in charge of Internet matters at the Elysée Palace, the organisers of the eG8 Forum - the President of ICANN - the Chairman of ICANN - the ICANN Board Secretary - the GAC Chairperson - the French GAC representatives - the GAC Secretariat - and several public fora for as wide a distribution as possible Regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair

1 0

WG: [EURO-Discuss] WIKIPEDIA for World Heritage
by Wolf Ludwig May 24, 2011

May 24, 2011

FYI - one of our Swiss/German members, Manuel Schneider, posted this info today on the EURALO list. I dare to forward this to the At-Large community. Best, Wolf ______ Manuel Schneider wrote Tue, 24 May 2011 16:26: >Dear all, > >a bit off-topic but I was assured that I may post this here: > >Our german friends at Wikimedia Deutschland, the national support >organisation between the Wikimedia projects such as Wikipedia, has >started a petition to convince the german government to nominate >Wikipedia as world heritage site at the UNESCO. > >So may I ask you - any EURALO members or interested ALSes - to sign up >at this petition: > >http://wikipedia.de/wke/Main_Page > >Of course that I as the contact person of Wikimedia CH, the swiss >Wikimedia chapter, am in favour of that petition, nonetheless of the >arguable chance to actually get selected. Even the discussions and >arguments that would follow the nomination are (in my personal opinion) >worth to start this process. >Wikipedia would be the first digital cultur phenomenon that has been >discussed at UNESCO. The vision to make knowledge available for every >human being in the world has driven a massive movement in the last 10 >years - also outside Wikipedia itself. > >Read here an article about this idea the New York Times: > >http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/technology/23wikipedia.html?_r=2&hpw=&pag… > >Thanks a lot, > > >Manuel >-- >Regards >Manuel Schneider > >Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens >Wikimedia CH - Association for the advancement of free knowledge >www.wikimedia.ch >_______________________________________________ >EURO-Discuss mailing list >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss > >Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch - EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig

1 0

Call for Expertise for a drafting team to develop a Whois Service Requirements survey
by Alan Greenberg May 24, 2011

May 24, 2011

>From: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> >Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:14:20 -0400 >Subject: [liaison6c] Call for Expertise for a >drafting team to develop a Whois Service Requirements survey > >Dear All, > >http://gnso.icann.org/announcements/announcement-19may11-en.htm > >Invitation for volunteers to form a Drafting >Team to develop a survey to estimate the level >of agreement that the conclusions and >assumptions in the Inventory of Whois Service >Requirements Report of 29 July 2010 have in the >ICANN community. See: ><http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-service-requirements-final-report-…>http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-service-requirements-final-report-…. >The goal of the Drafting Team would be to assist >staff in developing the format, questions, >response scale and scope of the survey. >In May 2009 by the GNSO Council requested that >staff prepare a compilation of potential future >requirements for WHOIS service, based on current >requirements and a review of previous GNSO WHOIS >policy discussions. This resolution reflected >increasing community concerns that the current >WHOIS service is deficient in a number of ways, >including data accuracy and reliability, as well >as in other technical areas noted in recent SSAC >reports, such as accessibility and readability >of WHOIS contact information in an international >environment. The report is a compendium of >potential technical requirements and makes no >policy recommendations. Some of the potential >technical requirements included in the report >are the following: a mechanism to find >authoritative WHOIS servers; structured queries; >a standardized set of query capabilities; a >well-defined schema for replies; standardized >error messages; improved quality of domain >registration data; internationalization; >security elements; thick vs. thin WHOIS; and a >Registrar abuse point of contact. Staff >published a first draft of the report 26 March >2010, solicited input from SOs and ACs, and >posted a draft final report reflecting SO and AC input on 31 May. >Thus, on 19 May the GNSO Council asked ICANN >staff to begin the process of seeking community >volunteers Drafting Team for the purpose of developing a survey of views. >This invitation is extended to all members of >the ICANN community. We urge you to forward to >this to all members of the community who may be >interested in participating. Expertise in the >technical aspects of gTLD Whois, and background >on the history of gTLD Whois policy development, >would be particularly useful to this group. >Please contact the GNSO Council Secretariat at ><mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org>gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >by 01 June 2011 if you are interested in joining >the Drafting Team. Please contact Liz Gasster >at ><mailto:liz.gasster@icann.org>liz.gasster(a)icann.org >if you have any questions about the report or the work of this group. > >Thank you. >Kind regards, >Glen > >Glen de Saint Géry >GNSO Secretariat >gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org >http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

WG: [IAMCR] Book announcement 'New media technologies and user empowerment'
by Wolf Ludwig May 24, 2011

May 24, 2011

FYI - with regards, Wolf ______ >New book announcement > >New Media Technologies and User Empowerment >Jo Pierson, Enid Mante-Meijer and Eugène Loos (eds.) >Peter Lang - International Academic Publishers >May 2011 >ISBN 978-3-631-60031-3 > >Peter Lang published the book 'New Media Technologies and User Empowerment' (edited by Jo Pierson, Enid Mante-Meijer and Eugène Loos) >Volume 6 in 'Participation in Broadband Society' series (edited by Leopoldina Fortunati, Julian Gebhardt and Jane Vincent) > >'This collection provides numerous and refreshing insights into the claims about the ever more proactive role of users of information and communication technologies. Through a variety of case studies, illustrating the array of theoretical frameworks available, the authors throw light upon the diverse ways in which users engage with innovations. From outlining the challenges of involving users in design, through appreciating the diverse origins and nature of user engagement with ICTs to critically commenting upon the constraints of the user experience, this book provides a welcome and useful contribution to the field.' (Leslie Haddon - LSE London School of Economics and Political Sciences) > >'User-generated content, produsage, collective intelligence – these terms have come into their own in recent years, filled with detail as researchers explore the finer nuances of participative Web environments. This is a rich collection of such work, exploring the successes and failures of innovative online projects, and examining how they affect the rhetoric of user empowerment that surrounds Web 2.0. A very welcome addition to this field of research.' (Axel Bruns - Author of Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage) > > >Synopsis: > >Recent developments in new media devices and applications have led to the rise of what have become known as ‘social media’, ‘Web 2.0’, ‘social computing’ or ‘participative web’. This shift in ICT, from unidirectional to conversational media of mass self-communication has lowered the technological thresholds for everyday users to cooperate for their own benefit, to participate in online environments and social network sites, to co-create business value and to become ‘produsers’ or ‘pro-ams’. At the same time, we see an evolution towards people-centred design and user-driven innovation in the design of new media technologies. This has created new opportunities and heightened expectations regarding user empowerment in different societal arenas. > >However, the question remains to what extent users and communities interacting in an all-IP new media ecosystem are empowered (and not disempowered) to express their creativity and concerns in their social and cultural environment and to obtain a prominent role in the process of new media design and innovation. The book attempts to answer this question through a collection of chapters that scrutinise this issue. The different chapters focus on the way that social and economic opportunities and threats enable and/or constrain user empowerment. > >This work consists of four major sections, each of which examines the (potential) empowerment/disempowerment of users in relation to new media technologies from a different angle. The chapters in the first section describe different theoretical perspectives on user roles and user involvement in the new media ecosystem, referring to interpretative, positivist and critical schools of thought. Based on these overall guiding frameworks, we then explore the leverage users have, both on content level and on technological level. This refers respectively to the second and third section of the book. In the fourth section different case studies are presented, each of which highlight how user empowerment manifests itself in different new media sectors and environments (such as publishing, the music industry and social networking sites). > >The book is based on interdisciplinary research. It offers innovative insights based on state-of-the-art academic and industry-driven ICT user research in various European countries. This work will appeal to post-graduate students and researchers in the field of media and communication studies, social studies of technology, digital media marketing and other domains that investigate the mutual relationship between new media technologies and society. > > >Contents: > >Yves Punie: Introduction: New Media Technologies and User Empowerment. Is there a Happy Ending? - Enid Mante-Meijer/Eugène Loos: Innovation and the Role of Push and Pull - Valerie Frissen/Mijke Slot: The Return of the Bricoleur: Redefining Media Business - Serge Proulx/Lorna Heaton: Forms of User Contribution in Online Communities: Mechanisms of Mutual Recognition between Contributors - Aphra Kerr/Stefano De Paoli/Cristiano Storni: Rethinking the Role of Users in ICT Design: Reflections for the Internet - James Stewart/Laurence Claeys: Problems and Opportunities of Interdisciplinary Work Involving Users in Speculative Research for Innovation of Novel ICT Applications - Marinka Vangenck/Jo Pierson/Wendy Van den Broeck/Bram Lievens: User-Driven Innovation in the Case of Three-Dimensional Urban Environments - Mijke Slot: Web Roles Re-examined: Exploring User Roles in the Media Environment - Philip Ely/David Frohlich/Nicola Green: Uncertainty, Upheavals and Upgrades: Digital-DIY during Life-change - Eva K. Törnquist: In Search of Elks and Birds: Two Case Studies on the Creative Use of ICT in Sweden - Levente Szekely/Agnes Urban: Over the Innovators and Early Adopters: Incentives and Obstacles of Internet Usage - James Stewart/Richard Coyne/Penny Travlou/Mark Wright/Henrik Ekeus: The Memory Space and the Conference: Exploring Future Uses of Web2.0 and Mobile Internet through Design Interventions - Sanna Martilla/Kati Hyyppä/Kari-Hans Kommonen: Co-Design of a Software Toolkit for Media Practices: P2P-Fusion Case Study - Ike Picone: Mapping Users' Motivations and Thresholds for Casually «Produsing» News - Stijn Bannier: The Musical Network 2.0 & 3.0 - Enid Mante-Meijer/Jo Pierson/Eugène Loos: Conclusion: Substantiating User Empowerment. > > >For more information on the book, follow the link below: > <http://www.peterlang.com/index.cfm?event=cmp.ccc.seitenstruktur.detailseite…> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Jo Pierson >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Free University of Brussels >Interdisciplinary Institute for Broadband Technology (IBBT) >Studies on Media, Information and Telecommunication (SMIT) >Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium >T: + 32 (0)2 629 2412 >F: +32 (0)2 629 1700 >E: Jo.Pierson(a)vub.ac.be >#imuses >Office: 0C.005 >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >International Association for Media and Communication Research - http://iamcr.org >Announcements mailing list > >Join IAMCR | http://iamcr.org/about-iamcr/membership/join-iamcr-mainmenu-237 > >Follow IAMCR's updates on Twitter | http://twitter.com/IAMCRtweets >Visit IAMCR's Facebook Page | http://www.facebook.com/iamcr.org > comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch - EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig

1 0

Fwd: Re: Follow-up to the second JAS WG report
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 23, 2011

May 23, 2011

Dear all, in preparation for tomorrow's monthly ALAC call, please be aware that on one of the agenda items, we'll be discussing the suggestion from the Board as relayed by Katim Touray. Kind regards, Olivier -------- Message original -------- Sujet: Re: Follow-up to the second JAS WG report Date : Mon, 23 May 2011 09:50:02 +0200 De : Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> Pour : Katim S. Touray <kstouray(a)gmail.com> Copie à : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak(a)gmail.com> Dear Katim, thank you very much for your kind message. From discussions that have taken place in the JAS working group, I am aware that the group would be very interested indeed in such an interaction. As far as the ALAC is concerned, I will ask for this question to be added to the agenda of our forthcoming monthly call, tomorrow Tuesday. I'll get back to you in due course. Warmest regards, Olivier On 23/05/2011 03:13, Katim S. Touray wrote : > Dear Olivier and Stéphane, > > First, let me congratulate you and your teams, as well as the JAS WG > on their second report. I've had the opportunity to go through it, > and it's quality work. > > To follow on the second JAS WG report, I would like to ask if you'd be > interested in organizing a conference call for interested board > members and the GNSO, GAC, and At-Large reps to discuss the status and > way forward for the recently released JAS WG report. The idea was > presented at the recently concluded board retreat in Istanbul that a > public meeting on the JAS WG report (with the participation of the > board and GAC) will be helpful, and toward this end, it would be > useful to have a conference call. Please let me know if this makes > sense to you and let me know when you want to have the call, if indeed > you want to have it. > > Again, thanks to all of you and your teams for the great work you're > doing on the issue! I hope we'll all be able to come together to have > a useful program we all can be proud of. Have a great week, and best > wishes! > > Sincerely, > > Katim > > -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

2 1

Re: [ALAC] [ALAC-Announce] Fwd: ICANN Summit on Developing Countries - Invitation to a preparatory meeting in Singapore
by Alan Greenberg May 22, 2011

May 22, 2011

I would very much like to be one of those representing At-Large at this meeting. I will gladly provide my input into the Review of At-Large WGs prior to the meeting. I currently do not have a conflict at this time with respect to the GNSO. Alan At 22/05/2011 06:17 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote: >FYI >Please note, however, that this will take place at the same time as our >ALAC and Regional Leadership Working Session 1, Agenda Item 1: Review of >At-Large Working Groups". >Kind regards, >Olivier > >-------- Original Message -------- >Sujet: ICANN Summit on Developing Countries - Invitation to a >preparatory meeting in Singapore >Date : Sun, 22 May 2011 10:42:49 +0100 >De : Katim S. Touray <kstouray(a)gmail.com> >Pour : >Copie à : > > > >Dear all, > > > >I am writing to invite you to send two representatives from your >SO/AC/group to attend a preparatory meeting to help organize a proposed >ICANN Summit on Developing Countries. > > > >A number of ICANN stakeholders, and myself, have been having online >discussions since early last month about having an ICANN Summit on >Developing Countries. The attached file is the original proposal for >the Summit, which is aimed at providing the ICANN community an >opportunity to have an in-depth discussion on developing countries, >their role in ICANN, and the way forward. > > > >In view of the fact that the Oct. 2011 ICANN annual public meeting will >be held in Dakar, Senegal, the aim is to have the Summit there. The >Summit will include presentations and discussions on the following topics: > > 1. A backgrounder on developing countries (what is a "developing > country" or "least developed country," socio-economic development > in these countries, Internet and ICT development in these countries) > 2. ICANN and developing countries (ICANN's relationship with ccTLDs, > international organizations of developing countries, governments, > NGOs, and businesses in developing countries, etc) > 3. Participation of Developing Countries in ICANN: Challenges, > Opportunities, and the Way Forward > >The meeting in Singapore will have about 20 or so invitees from the SOs, >ACs, liaisons, other stakeholders, as well as some ICANN board members >and staff. The tentative agenda for the Singapore meeting will consist >of the following: > > 1. What the proposed Summit will discuss? > 2. Who will be on the panel of presenters? > 3. The format for the Summit > 4. (S)election of Summit Organizing Committee (SOC) > >Additional details of the Singapore meeting are as follows: > >*Date:* Sunday, June 19, 2011 > >*Time:* 09:00-10:30 (90 minutes) > >*Location:* Raffles Ballroom > >*Service:* Simultaneous Interpretation in French and Spanish > > > >Please let me know when you have selected your representatives to the >meeting, and who they are. > > > >Thank you in advance for your consideration, and please do not hesitate >to let me know if you need any additional information from me. > > > >Sincerely, > > > >Katim > > > >

1 0

Letter of support for promoting non-English/non-Latinscripts in New gTLD Application Process
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 19, 2011

May 19, 2011

Dear ALAC members and RALO Leaders, I have been contacted by Ron Andruff and Marilyn Cade, asking us whether we would like to affix our signatures on a letter to the Board supporting promoting non-English/non-Latinscripts in the New gTLD application process. This letter can be found on: http://icann.org/en/correspondence/andruff-et-al-to-dengate-thrush-beckstro… There has been much individual support from members of the Joint Applicant Support (JAS) working group as well as some ALAC members who have already signed the letter in their own capacity, myself included. If you would like to sign this letter in your own, or your ALS's capacity, please email your consent to: randruff(a)rnapartners.com Also please feel free to forward this call on your local RALO list, should you think ALSes in your regions might be interested in signing the letter. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Fwd: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report
by Alan Greenberg May 17, 2011

May 17, 2011

Please see the following reply I sent to the GNSO list. There was not sufficient time to get it reviewed prior to sending, but if I have incorrectly represented the ALAC, please let me know and I will post a correction. The note was in reply to a proposal from Mary Wong with comments from Tim Ruiz and Jeff Neuman. Alan >Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:53:43 -0400 >To: GNSO Council <council(a)gnso.icann.org> >From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> >Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the ALAC >on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report > >I will try to address Jeff's questions, but will >in parallel pass my answers by the ALAC to >ensure that I am not putting words into their collective mouths. > >First, I read Mary's "the chartering process" to >mean "the process laid out in their charter(s)". > >On why At-Large staff forwarded the report to >the Board, this was done at the request of the >ALAC through its Chair and Executive Committee >and was not an independent action of staff.. > >Regarding the appropriateness of one of the >chartering organizations sending the report to >the Board, the GNSO charter had the following >sentence which the ALAC copied verbatim: "4. All >communication to the ICANN Board regarding the >work of this Working Group shall be through the >respective SO/AC unless expressly approved by >the respective SO/AC." There is nothing there >that I construe to meaning that the chartering >organizations must work in tandem. > >Alan > >At 17/05/2011 09:02 AM, Neuman, Jeff wrote: >>I also would like to see the statement about >>the "scrupulous observance of the chartering >>process" removed. We still need to find out why >>the at-large icann staff sent the report to the >>board on May 9th as is indicated in Olivier's >>note. I am also not convinced that one >>organization sending the report to the board >>without the approval of the other organization >>is in line with the chartering process, but we can discuss that further. >>Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. >>Vice President, Law & Policy >>NeuStar, Inc. >>Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.biz >> >> >> >>From: tim(a)godaddy.com [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] >>Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 08:12 AM >>To: StÃ©phane Van Gelder >><stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com>; >>owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org >><owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org>; Council GNSO <council(a)gnso.icann.org> >>Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the >>ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report >> >>No objection if you remove the last sentence. >>There is no chartering process for CWGs. The >>ALAC and GNSO could not even agree on what the >>charter should be. And at least a few of us >>have concerns about how and why CWGs are being formed.Tim >> >>From: StÃ©phane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder(a)indom.com> >>Sender: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org >>Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:45:21 +0200 >>To: Council GNSO<council(a)gnso.icann.org> >>Subject: Re: [council] Re: Statement of the >>ALAC on the Joint Applicant Support Second Milestone Report >>Councillors, >> >>Please find below the NCSG's suggestion on a >>message which I could send to the Chairman of >>the Board in my capacity as Chair of the GNSO. >> >>Thanks Mary for providing this draft. >> >>Please let me have your comments. >> >>StÃ©phane >> >> >> >>Le 14 mai 2011 Ã 16:31, >><<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong(a)law.unh.edu> >><<mailto:Mary.Wong@law.unh.edu>Mary.Wong(a)law.unh.edu> a Ã©crit : >> >>>Hi - sorry for the delay in getting back to >>>you on the Council letter; there has been some >>>lively discussion among some NCSG folks about it. >>> >>>We suggest the following draft: >>> >>>Dear Peter, >>> >>>We understand that ALAC has forwarded to the >>>Board the Joint SO/AC New gTLD Applicant >>>Support Working Group (JAS WG)'s Second >>>Milestone Report. As the other chartering >>>organization of the JAS WG, the GNSO Council >>>notes that it has not yet approved the Report. >>>We acknowledge the Board's desire to move >>>forward with new gTLDs, including issues >>>relating to applicant support, and hope to >>>provide the Board with our advice and recommendations as soon as possible. >>>The GNSO Council would also like to inform the >>>Board that it appreciates the JAS WG's >>>scrupulous observance of the chartering >>>process, in submitting its Report >>>simultaneously to ALAC and the GNSO for review. >>> >>>I would be grateful if you could convey the >>>GNSO Council's message to the Board. >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Stephane van Gelder >>>Cheers >>>Mary >>> >>> >>>Mary W S Wong >>>Professor of Law >>>Chair, Graduate IP Programs >>>Director, Franklin Pierce Center for IP >>>UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two >>>White Street Concord, NH 03301 USA Email: >>><mailto:mary.wong@law.unh.edu>mary.wong(a)law.unh.edu >>>Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage: >>><http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php>http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php >>>Selected writings available on the Social >>>Science Research Network (SSRN) at: >>><http://ssrn.com/author=437584>http://ssrn.com/author=437584>>>

3 2

Re: [ALAC] [NA-Discuss] Public Comment on the .NET auto-renew, proposed contract extension for multiple technical providers
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 16, 2011

May 16, 2011

Hello Joly, yes, we indeed have a draft, available on the same WIKI URL: https://community.icann.org/x/noHg This is named "Second Draft" since the initial "draft" were the two emails from Eric Brunner Williams. Since we are under pressure to send this statement for it to be considered by the Board, please add your comments to the bottom of that Wiki page by Tuesday 17 May 2011, 11:00 UTC. Many thanks, Olivier On 16/05/2011 20:35, Joly MacFie wrote : > > Do we have a draft? Wiki url? > > j > > > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond > <ocl(a)gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>> wrote: > > > > On 11/05/2011 03:15, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote : > > if we file it by June 18th > > Of course - I meant by May 18th. That's what happens when you > write past > 3:00am... > > Olivier > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > <mailto:NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 0

Fwd: [council] GAC advice on protecting International Olympic Committee and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
by Alan Greenberg May 13, 2011

May 13, 2011

Inter-sessional advice from the GAC. Perhaps a first? Alan >From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin(a)melbourneit.com.au> >To: "council(a)gnso.icann.org" <council(a)gnso.icann.org> >Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 19:20:38 -0400 >Subject: [council] GAC advice on protecting International Olympic Committee > and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement > >Latest advice from GAC: > >Mr. Peter Dengate Thrush >Chairman of the Board >ICANN > >Dear Peter, > >I am writing to express the strong support of >the GAC for the requests from the >International Olympic Committee and the >International Red Cross and Red Crescent >Movement for the key words most directly >associated with their respective Charters to >be added to the Reserved Names list. > >The GAC believes that this would provide the >most appropriate form of protection of >the global public interest invested in these two >organisations. In both cases, there are >existing protections in national law, in >multiple jurisdictions, as well as coverage under an international instrument. > >The GAC advises the ICANN Board to approve these >requests and to direct staff to >reflect the Boardâs approval in the May 30, >2011 version of the Applicant Guidebook. > >Heather Dryden >Chair, Governmental Advisory Committee >Senior Advisor to the Government of Canada

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [NA-Discuss] Public Comment on the .NET auto-renew, proposed contract extension for multiple technical providers
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond May 11, 2011

May 11, 2011

Eric, in line with recognizing initiative coming from the grass-roots and since I have noticed support at NARALO level, I have asked At-Large staff to liaise with ICANN policy staff about this, since the deadline for comments was today. I am happy to announce that we have been kindly given the ability to file an ALAC Statement in time for the Board to consider it during their retreat, if we file it by June 18th, even though it is past the public comments deadline. Seth will set-up a Wiki page and will be liaising with you and Beau Brendler in order to get a proposed first draft up for At-Large comment as soon as possible, and we'll have a comment period open until Sunday 15th May. If it gets support, we'll submit an ALAC Statement. Kind regards, Olivier Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair On 09/05/2011 23:41, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote : > Colleagues, > > I'm submitting two comments, the SECOND of which follows, proposing > contract extension for multiple technical providers. > > The public announcement is here: > http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-11apr11-en.htm > > If anyone wants to co-sign, you'll have to explicitly let me know. > I'll be submitting the comment around 9am EDT tomorrow. > > Begin: > > > The proposed changes to the .NET agreement, while of some utility, do > not address the core problem of monopoly power by the registry > operator. This is a hold-over from the May 1999 decision to create a > locus of competition in a separate registrar function, a decision > reversed in November 2010. > > The contract should be changed to include language which separates the > formal Registry Operator (RO) functions (zone file signing, zone file > production from one or more distinct data sources, pointer data to > registrar held "thin registry" registrant data, registrar transfer > processing, registrar invoicing, ICANN reporting and transactional fee > processing and payment), from the Data Base Operator (DBO) (aka > "registry technical services") set of functions, allowing registrants, > through their registrars, to select the underlying competitive DBO for > a given domain. > > The means to allow the .NET contract to be modified, allowing a > second, and subsequent Data Base Operators to provide database service > to the Registry Operator, is now necessary, in light of the removal of > structural separation requirement for legacy contracts. > > No specific set-aside for ROOT-SERVERS.NET is necessary under a > stability and security theory, as the root server operators are > capable of designating whether they seek to use a DBO other than the > current unique DBO. > > An additional extension to EPP will be necessary, to allow registrants > to select, through the registrar function, their choice of DBO to have > custody of their data. > > It is possible that the registrars with a large number of domains, or > other mature database operators, including the operators of other > registries, also currently contractually constrained as monopolies, > will seek to become Competitive Data Base Operators (CDBOs) for the > .NET registry, transforming over 10% of the gTLD domain market from > monopoly to competition. > > The default choice of many users may remain Verisign, the legacy > monopoly registry entity. However, where competition is possible, and > competition among back-end registry service providers within a single > name space is possible, it must be allowed if the competition policy > goal is to be achieved in the current decade. > > End > > To be sent to net-agreement-renewal(a)icann.org. Forward as you see fit. > > Eric > ------ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss > > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org > ------ > -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

1 1

Statement to the Board on RAA negotiation process
by Alan Greenberg May 3, 2011

May 3, 2011

At the last ALAC meeting, I was asked to revise the letter to the Board with the help of Evan. We have now done so and the revised version can be found at https://community.icann.org/x/zYbT. Alan

1 0