I think that the internet should be left open. It is true that generates discussion. Like "Public interest" we are not clear about the definition, but we do many things in the public interest without having that definition.

We can continue discussing the definition of both concepts, and continue working ...

Goran himself in a meeting said something similar to this, although I do not remember what concept: if you ask me the definition, I do not have it, but we are doing many things even without the definition.

Regards

Alberto

De: ALAC <alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> En nombre de Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
Enviado el: martes, 08 de mayo de 2018 04:57 a.m.
Para: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>; Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>; Vanda Scartezini <vanda@scartezini.org>
CC: ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Asunto: Re: [ALAC] Auction proceeds survey

Dear Alan,

On 08/05/2018 07:30, Alan Greenberg wrote:

- Regarding the "open Internet" issue. I strongly support it staying. We will still need to consider the ICANN mission, but if we restrict things too much, we will end up doing ONLY things that ICANN itself could or should be doing and we will have lost a HUGE opportunity to do really good things with what is likely to be close to 1/4 of a billion dollars. If we end up wasting that, it would be a pity.

I support the "open Internet" but the problem I have is that there are calls to define what the "open Internet" is. It just smells like another debate to define what "the public interest" is.
Kindest regards,

Olivier