- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Evan Leibovitch July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

Alan Greenberg wrote: > I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does > that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with > and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole > responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through > with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to > happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really want. > No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct. The definition of "get rid of the Excom" seems self-evident to me; I assume you are asking what would replace its current functions. But you've also asked for some ancillary questions related to Vice-Chairs etc so I'll offer my vision of it all. The Chair of ALAC has certain functions. It is reasonable to have a Vice-Chair in case the Chair is temporarily unable to function. Unless there are many instances in which both the Chair and Vice-Chair are unavailable, having more than one Vice-Chair position is redundant. Anything more than Chair, a single Vice-Chair and a Secretariat is sheer bloat driven by politics (ie, some kind of equity doctrine) rather than merit. These three people ought to have the authority to act in emergency measures -- that is, when unforeseen deadlines any other circumstances occur in which the ALAC cannot practically be consulted. However, these circumstances must be minimized and foreseen when possible, and all such emergency actions should be reported back to ALAC at the next opportunity (by email, not then next ALAC meeting) for subsequent action. Non-emergency matters of ANY kind should not be undertaken by any body other than ALAC or an open-membership At-Large working group created by ALAC. Such working groups require at least one ALAC member or RALO leader as chair/liaison who will report on its activities (and bring forward resolutions) to ALAC meetings; otherwise membership is open to any bonafide member of At-Large (an ALS or individual members according to appropriate regional policies). The working groups are to operate informally and by rough consensus of all involved. In the case of the two documents being discussed at the ExecComm tomorrow, these should both have been drafted by an administrative (standing) WG, open to participation by anyone in At-Large who is interest in actively helping. (Who knows? such an Admin WG might have the same people currently in the ExecCom... but the difference is that others are welcome to participate *as equals* and not just non-voting bystanders.) I would envision that the Admin WG would be chaired by the ALAC Secretary and have the participation of all RALO Secretariats and anyone else who is interested. The ALAC Chair should not chair any working group. That position has enough to do and others must be encouraged to share the load. Each ALAC member is expected, as a minimum, to be either - Chair, Vice-Chair or Secretary - Liaison to an ICANN committee or constituency - Chair of an At-Large Working Group RALO chairs and secretariats are also expected to be part of at least one working group, serving as chairs if no ALAC members are available (ie, the number of WGs exceeds the number of ALAC members not otherwise occupied) These should be part of the job descriptions. Any ALAC member or RALO leader incapable or unwilling to fulfil such responsibilities should resign, be recalled, or instructed not to stand for election or nomination. There. I don't know about succinct by I hope that this vision is clear enough. You wanted alternatives, here's one. - Evan

2 1

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Alan Greenberg July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

Darlene, I was actually trying to be helpful, although apparently not successfully. My request for further clarification was not targeted at you specifically, but asking all who were calling for the ExCom to disappear to explain what they meant, because I truly do not understand what they want instead. Again, if you felt my comments were inappropriate, I regret having made them. Alan At 14/07/2009 05:05 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >Hey Alan, > >I was trying to be helpful - thank you SO much for your encouraging >words. > >See my next e-mail for succinctness that you obviously found lacking in >this one. > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >Community Access Program Administrator >Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: (867) 975-5631 >Fax: (867) 975-5610 >E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > >-----Original Message----- >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan >Greenberg >Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:24 PM >To: ALAC Working List >Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July > >The issue of performance guidelines, which based on discussions prior >to and in Sydney led to the clear need for a Job Description, all >falls on my plate. > >Knowing that I would be rather busy with other matters for a few >weeks after Sydney, and that Cheryl would be out of commission for a >while, we asked staff to do the first draft of a job description. You >alluded to the last performance paper that crashed and burnt - I most >definitely did not want that to happen to this new document, so it >seemed wise for someone other than staff to look at it before opening >full comments. THAT is why it was on the agenda. How would you have >done it differently? > >I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does >that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with >and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole >responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through >with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to >happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really >want. No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct. > >Alan > >At 14/07/2009 03:22 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: > >Wow! > > > >Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your > >exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can > >I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in >from > >the outside. > > > >However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was > >substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored. > > > >Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then > >they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being > >from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has > >cleaned house at least once. > > > >We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to >also > >have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those > >performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also > >for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just >don't > >show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and > >comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a > >judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be > >reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around > >ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but >for > >reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to >go > >back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not > >performing and get rid of the ExComm. > > > >I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio > >"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh > >in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this >should > >be done but something needs to change. > > > >D > > > >Darlene A. Thompson > >Community Access Program Administrator > >Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP > >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 > >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 > >Phone: (867) 975-5631 > >Fax: (867) 975-5610 > >E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan > >Greenberg > >Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:39 PM > >To: ALAC Working List > >Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July > > > >At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: > > > > >This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a >group > > >of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC > > >needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is) > > > >Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I > >typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee, > >silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom > >(Adam being the one exception). > > > >If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there > >would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and > >not just criticize. > > > >Alan > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ican >n > >.org > > > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann >.org > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Thompson, Darlene July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

Hey Alan, I was trying to be helpful - thank you SO much for your encouraging words. See my next e-mail for succinctness that you obviously found lacking in this one. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:24 PM To: ALAC Working List Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July The issue of performance guidelines, which based on discussions prior to and in Sydney led to the clear need for a Job Description, all falls on my plate. Knowing that I would be rather busy with other matters for a few weeks after Sydney, and that Cheryl would be out of commission for a while, we asked staff to do the first draft of a job description. You alluded to the last performance paper that crashed and burnt - I most definitely did not want that to happen to this new document, so it seemed wise for someone other than staff to look at it before opening full comments. THAT is why it was on the agenda. How would you have done it differently? I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really want. No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct. Alan At 14/07/2009 03:22 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >Wow! > >Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your >exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can >I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from >the outside. > >However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was >substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored. > >Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then >they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being >from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has >cleaned house at least once. > >We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also >have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those >performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also >for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't >show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and >comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a >judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be >reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around >ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for >reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go >back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not >performing and get rid of the ExComm. > >I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio >"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh >in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should >be done but something needs to change. > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >Community Access Program Administrator >Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: (867) 975-5631 >Fax: (867) 975-5610 >E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > >-----Original Message----- >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan >Greenberg >Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:39 PM >To: ALAC Working List >Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July > >At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: > > >This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group > >of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC > >needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is) > >Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I >typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee, >silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom >(Adam being the one exception). > >If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there >would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and >not just criticize. > >Alan > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ican n >.org > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Alan Greenberg July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

The issue of performance guidelines, which based on discussions prior to and in Sydney led to the clear need for a Job Description, all falls on my plate. Knowing that I would be rather busy with other matters for a few weeks after Sydney, and that Cheryl would be out of commission for a while, we asked staff to do the first draft of a job description. You alluded to the last performance paper that crashed and burnt - I most definitely did not want that to happen to this new document, so it seemed wise for someone other than staff to look at it before opening full comments. THAT is why it was on the agenda. How would you have done it differently? I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really want. No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct. Alan At 14/07/2009 03:22 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >Wow! > >Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your >exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can >I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from >the outside. > >However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was >substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored. > >Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then >they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being >from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has >cleaned house at least once. > >We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also >have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those >performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also >for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't >show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and >comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a >judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be >reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around >ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for >reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go >back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not >performing and get rid of the ExComm. > >I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio >"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh >in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should >be done but something needs to change. > >D > >Darlene A. Thompson >Community Access Program Administrator >Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 >Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 >Phone: (867) 975-5631 >Fax: (867) 975-5610 >E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca > > >-----Original Message----- >From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan >Greenberg >Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:39 PM >To: ALAC Working List >Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July > >At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: > > >This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group > >of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC > >needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is) > >Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I >typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee, >silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom >(Adam being the one exception). > >If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there >would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and >not just criticize. > >Alan > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann >.org > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Thompson, Darlene July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

Wow! Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from the outside. However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored. Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has cleaned house at least once. We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not performing and get rid of the ExComm. I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio "police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should be done but something needs to change. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:39 PM To: ALAC Working List Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group >of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC >needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is) Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee, silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom (Adam being the one exception). If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and not just criticize. Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
by Alan Greenberg July 14, 2009

July 14, 2009

At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote: >This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group >of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC >needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is) Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee, silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom (Adam being the one exception). If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and not just criticize. Alan

1 0

TO POST: Statement on the Public Consultation on Expense Analysis
by Alan Greenberg July 13, 2009

July 13, 2009

We have had two positive comments and no negative ones. I would suggest that we post the comment on the ICANN comment page as an ALAC statement noting that it is in the process of being ratified, and at the same time start a 7-day vote. Cheryl/Vanda, can you give the word to do this? The deadline for posts in the end of July 13th in California, about 28 hours from when I am sending this message. Alan At 09/07/2009 07:47 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >The ICANN budget expense analysis has been posted for some time now >and the comment period has been extended to July 13 - see >http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#eag-feedback. I would like >to propose that the following statement be submitted to the ICANN >comment process and (after the fact) ratified by the ALAC. It is not >controversial but indicates that we are happy with the new detail >provided and encourage it to be expanded and made more useful. > >If anyone DISAGREES or feels that it is inappropriate for us to >comment, please speak up quickly. > >Thanks to Nick for the original draft of this statement. > >Alan > >---------------------------------- > >Statement of the ALAC to the Public Consultation on Expense Analysis > >The ALAC wishes to commend the ICANN Board and financial management >team on the greater transparency in its financial operations visible >in the current FY budget. We look forward to further efforts of this >kind to make ICANN's financial operations more transparent. > >In that vein, we wish to suggest more direct links in reporting >between budget allocations and actual expenditure, and the link >between financing for initiatives and their outcomes. For example, >reporting on how effective recruitment and outreach efforts to grow >the active ICANN community are when contrasted with the varying >amounts budgeted and spent for these activities from year to year >would be widely useful in our view. > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac

1 0

Statement on the Public Consultation on Expense Analysis
by Alan Greenberg July 10, 2009

July 10, 2009

The ICANN budget expense analysis has been posted for some time now and the comment period has been extended to July 13 - see http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#eag-feedback. I would like to propose that the following statement be submitted to the ICANN comment process and (after the fact) ratified by the ALAC. It is not controversial but indicates that we are happy with the new detail provided and encourage it to be expanded and made more useful. If anyone DISAGREES or feels that it is inappropriate for us to comment, please speak up quickly. Thanks to Nick for the original draft of this statement. Alan ---------------------------------- Statement of the ALAC to the Public Consultation on Expense Analysis The ALAC wishes to commend the ICANN Board and financial management team on the greater transparency in its financial operations visible in the current FY budget. We look forward to further efforts of this kind to make ICANN's financial operations more transparent. In that vein, we wish to suggest more direct links in reporting between budget allocations and actual expenditure, and the link between financing for initiatives and their outcomes. For example, reporting on how effective recruitment and outreach efforts to grow the active ICANN community are when contrasted with the varying amounts budgeted and spent for these activities from year to year would be widely useful in our view.

3 2

ccNSO working group on delegation/redelegation policies
by Adam Peake July 9, 2009

July 9, 2009

Anyone know if the ccNSO has started a working group on delegation/redelegation policies? If they have and At Large/ALAC are asked to provide members, I'd like to join. See: <http://www.icann.org/en/topics/policy/update-jun09-en.htm#2> "CCNSO TO EXPLORE CCTLD DELEGATION AND RELATED POLICIES At a Glance The Council of the country code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO) has approved a working group to advise the ccNSO Council on launching a policy development process on the delegation, re-delegation and retirement of ccTLDs Recent Developments The ccNSO revisited the need to review and update the current policy for the delegation, re-delegation and retirement of country code Top Level Domains at the Mexico City ICANN meeting. It concluded that as a first step, a working group needed to be established to better understand the scope and issues involved, and to ensure involvement of the GAC as they have an interest in the topic as well. Next Steps The ccNSO Secretariat will send out a call for members and observers to the working group. The ccNSO Council expects to appoint members to the working group at its Sydney meeting." Best, Adam

2 1

Fwd: [OIA] Monday 13 July 2009 ICANN Meeting on Proposed Englobulation of Domain Names
by Gareth Shearman July 9, 2009

July 9, 2009

Begin forwarded message: > From: jays(a)panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) > Date: July 9, 2009 8:47:38 AM PDT (CA) > To: oia(a)lists.bway.net > Subject: [OIA] Monday 13 July 2009 ICANN Meeting on Proposed > Englobulation of Domain Names > > On Monday 13 July 2009 ICANN will meet in the Hudson Theatre of > the Millennium Hotel at 145 West 45th Street on the Island of the > Manahattoes. > > The Hudson Theatre is a serious theatre: > > http://www.millenniumhotels.com/millenniumnewyork/other/index.html > > and ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, > have use of this theatre all day Monday 13 July 2009. > > ICANN has called this meeting in order to be able to claim that > ICANN has consulted with the public on a proposed New World Order > of Domain Names. Under the new order, if you or I or PETA or the > Green Party, or the Ranters and Gun Owners Association, or > NYLUG-SOCIAL, were to apply for a domain name, first a new arm of > ICANN, an arm chartered to act in the interests of some hundred > large world wide corporations, would have to vet your proposed > new domain name. If this new agency of ICANN disapproves your > name, then you would have to, right off the bat, pay $20,000 in > American money, to hire a lawyer to fight ICANN. ICANN would run > a new trans-national para-legal court in which the case would be > heard. The court would formally be a creature of the hundred > large companies. > > Of course, the Englobulators have made sure that no public notice > of this event has been made. Have you seen notice on Slashdot? > In the New York Times? No. But well paid lobbyists and > spokesmodels for the Englobulators have been hired to attend this > meeting. They will come in force, and they will be armed with > slides, and sheaves of paper, on which will be written their best > arguments for you giving up your right to the domain name of your > choice. > > What can we do to stop this extraordinary attempt to subvert > traditional trademark law? We can show up at the Hudson Theatre > on Monday and ask why these hundred companies are formally > created a special class within the New World Order of Domain Names. > > Please register to attend this supposedly public ICANN meeting. > The registration deadline is tomorrow 10 July 2009: > > http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/ > > Please read the Report of the Englobulators on a New World Order > of Domain Names, called the IRT Final Report on Trademark > Protection: > > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm > > (See pages 15 and 16 in the pdf of the report for a presentation > of the special status to be accorded the Hundred Corporations. > The Hundred Corporations are those named in the "Globally > Protected Marks List".) > > > Here is further information: > > ICANN Announcement on Events: > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-12jun09-en.htm > > Public Comment on Final IRT Report: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/ > > Public Comment on Draft IRT Report: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-draft-report/ > > Here are three collocations of arguments against the New Domain > Name System: > > IP Justice Comments: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00210.html > > EFF Australia Comments: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00179.html > > Comments from Kathy Kleiman: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-draft-report/msg00068.html > > > Below my signature are two notices about this meeting, one by > Seth Johnson, and one by Kathy Kleiman, of the Noncommercial > Users Constituency: > > http://icann-ncuc.ning.com > > Kathy alerted Seth and me to this meeting. Kathy is point in the > fight against this large attempt on the traditional system of > trademark and on our ancient right of free naming on the Net. > Please write to Kathy Kleiman if you would like to meet with her > and other partisans on Sunday 12 July 2009 in New York City, or > early on Monday 13 July 2009: > > kathy(a)kathykleiman.com > > We hope you will come to the Hudson Theatre on Monday 13 July > 2009 and help defeat the Englobulators. > > Jay Sulzberger <secretary(a)lxny.org> > Corresponding Secretary LXNY > LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization. > http://www.lxny.org > > > <blockquote > what="notice by Seth Johnson" > edits="one typo repaired"> > > Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:07:51 -0400 > From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson(a)RealMeasures.dyndns.org> > Reply-To: seth.johnson(a)RealMeasures.dyndns.org > Organization: Real Measures > To: discuss(a)freeculture.org, Kathy(a)KathyKleiman.com > Subject: NY FC Fighters Needed -- Stand Against Trademark Abuse at > ICANN > > Hi folks, this is you. We *need to get to this hearing, the New York > phase of a rapid series of meetings around the world by ICANN. Please > see the blurb below. You MUST REGISTER by TOMORROW. It's at the > Millennium Hotel this Monday. > > (Others in other cities, get ready) > > This is the rollout for the new Global Top Level Domains. It's the > supposed public input phase. But it's also about putting in place a > massive, global change in trademark policy. > > Get this -- the group that put this plan together (the "Implementation > Recommendation Team" or IRT) has already closed shop before initiating > these meetings -- so what's the point? > > Domain names don't match up with trademark law -- DNS is about giving > symbols one universal address. Language is not. You don't trademark > "Apple" -- you reserve the use of that trademark to market a > particular kind of goods or service. Thus we have Apple Computers and > The Beatles' Apple music company. Or Sun Oil in Canada, a completely > separate company from Sun Oil in America -- and certainly not the same > as the Sun computing company. There's also fair use -- and of course > free speech. > > The MPAA and International Trademark have had a hand in ICANN > from its inception, when they required the Uniform Dispute > Resolution Policy. Now, along with rolling out new global Top > Level Domains, trademark owners are ramming through a new process > that goes well beyond that. They are pulling out the stops to > get ICANN to implement what will in practical terms amount to a > huge revision in the nature of trademark, backed by strong > practical action. Along with a new "Uniform Rapid Suspension > System" to shut down sites quickly, they are establishing ICANN > as playing the role of policing trademarks -- which by law is the > trademark holders' responsibility. > > The thing to remember is that while domain names and trademarks > might be hard to get a hold of politically, this sets a huge > precedent that will change trademark beyond that area. So we > call them on their process. > > (Among other things, this will mean no more Yes Men. :-) ) > > Kathy Kleiman of the ICANN "Noncommercial Users Constituency" > will be able to brief you more fully. She can also explain what > went down in the previous discussions, where they've essentially > ignored all the substantive points she presented. It's up to us > to come in in numbers and say we got their number. > > See below blurb from Kathy. > > > Seth > > </blockquote> > > > <blockquote > what="notice by Kathy Kleiman" > edits="some re-formatting"> > > ICANN Public Consultation: Should New Top Level Domains Include Broad > New Trademark Protections? > > > On Mon, July 13, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and > Numbers (ICANN) will hold a public consultation at the Hudson > Theatre, Millennium Hotel, 145 West 44th Street, to discuss the > "rules of the road" for new generic top level domains (gTLDs), future > competitors to .COM, .ORG and .NET. > > > A group of trademark attorneys, representing large brand owners, in > May wrote a report calling on ICANN to create broad new trademark > protections before opening up new gTLDs. > > A. IP Clearinghouse: a massive database of registered and > unregistered trademark rights created by ICANN (IRT > Report, pp. 12-16 > > B. Globally Protected Marks List: a list of global marks > created and maintained by ICANN (IRT Report, pp. 16- > 22) > > C. Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS): A ultra-fast > takedown service with little notice or time to respond > by domain name registrants (IRT, pp. 25-37) > > These proposals have been criticized as outside the mission and scope > of ICANN, a technical body, and outside the protections and limits > of trademark law. ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency writes "We > fear the impact of the IRT Proposals on free speech and fair use > online. Trademark owners don't own strings of letters, they have a > trademark for specific goods and services. Basic words like APPLE, > TIDE, SUN and TIME belong to all of us. Many important domain names > will be lost, or worse, blocked before they can be registered." > > Approval of the IRT Report is being rushed through ICANN with minimal > opportunity to comment. It is vital that ICANN hear comment as soon > as possible, and Monday is an opportunity to speak. > > ICANN's Noncommercial Users Constituency will be hosting a > breakfast at the Millennium Hotel on Monday morning. Please > contact NCUC Co-Founder Kathy Kleiman, > > kathy(a)kathykleiman.com > > for more details. > > > Registration to speak on 7/13 at this link (deadline 7/10): > > http://www.registration123.com/ICANN/GTLD/ > > > IRT Report: > http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-29may09-en.htm > > IP Justice Comments: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00210.html > > EFF Australia Comments: > http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00179.html > > Noncommercial Users Constituency Website with comments: > http://icann-ncuc.ning.com/ > > </blockquote> > _______________________________________________ > Open Infrastructure Alliance > http://lists.bway.net/listinfo/oia >

1 0