I like this heretic idea. Theo On 13-2-2018 17:36, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
With the risk of being branded a heretic, or traitor, and burned at the stake, I would like to suggest a radical idea here. It starts from the observation that ICANN will be unable to come up with a sustainable workable solution here. This PDP-WG is going slow not because of conflicting stakeholder interests within its constituencies. It is going slow because at this level there is no tractable solution.
My heretical idea is to take a page from how the International Labour Organization (ILO) approaches such global problems (e.g. labour at sea). The idea starts with the fact that the solution to this problem lies with the Registrar’s dealing collectively with their own national governments and working out a multilateral agreement on the boundaries between lawful and unlawful, and between legal and illegal, that allow them to operate globally under a compatible, if not common, set of data privacy and protection regulations.
Within the context of the ILO’s more restrictive multi-stakeholder process, where stakeholders include industry, government, and organized labor, the ILO policy development process works up proposed solutions that are then feed into multilateral deliberations. The ILO operates more like a “Think Tank” in the search for multi-lateral solutions to global labor problems, solutions to be adopted by its member states in multilateral negotiations with each other and endorsed by and accepted by its industry and organized labor stakeholders.
This approach would toss the work on a solution to where that work belongs, outside ICANN and in negotiations between nation states who set the data privacy and security regulations and the Registrars who must observe them. Neither of those impacts on ICANN’s core remit. ICANN could function more like a “Think Tank” expressing a broader multistakeholder view of the issues and proposed solutions. ICANN’s contracts would be easier to write, since they would focus on the stability and security of the domain name system, in a global and multilingual setting.
This would also terminate the “shadow dance” and non-productive struggle between the constituency and stakeholder groups within ICANN with, and against, the roles of GAC and Registrars within the ICANN policy development process. CAG members could go home and tell their respective countries to organize to discuss data privacy and security policy with the Registrar’s. ICANN could better deploy its (probably) shrinking revenue stream and act as a “friend of the discussions”, or offer a venue for those discussions, while protecting its own remit.
Lastly, this might free up some ICANN resources, and Registrar attention, to the distributed ledger technologies (DLTs: e.g. blockchain) that are likely to radically change domain name registration and transfer soon. That will likely have significant negative impact on both Registrar and ICANN revenues. Registrar's can go for revenues from more registration services. Not sure what ICANN can do, other than cut costs.
Lastly, if I am to burn at the stake, please use only wood, it is a renewable resource and forests recycle the carbon. I worry about climate change. Also, you could not do it in Puerto Rico, I won't be there. Also, either pick a cold climate for collateral warmth, or bring hot dogs.
Sam L.