April 2012 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Conflicts in the Future
by Carlton Samuels April 30, 2012

April 30, 2012

See our colleague, Charles Mok on conflcits [of interests] here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHdStGV37iI - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Dot.ca manager doesn’t seem to trust Canadians
by Glenn McKnight April 29, 2012

April 29, 2012

http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see… Dot.ca manager doesn’t seem to trust Canadians Published On Sun Apr 29 2012 - Email <http://www.thestar.com/email/1169582> - Print <http://www.thestar.com/printarticle/1169582> - (0)<http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see…> - Share on facebook<http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see…>Share on twitter<http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see…>Share on digg<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=thestar&sourc…>Share on delicious<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=thestar&sourc…> Rss <http://www.thestar.com/rss?categories=business> - Article<http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see…> - Comments (0)<http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1169582--dot-ca-manager-doesn-t-see…> [image: Image]<http://www.thestar.com/business/columnists/94542--geist-michael> By Michael Geist<http://www.thestar.com/business/columnists/94542--geist-michael>Internet Law Columnist The Canadian Internet Registration Authority, the non-profit agency charged with managing the dot-ca domain name, has emerged in recent years as an important voice on Internet governance. Backed by a big bank account — CIRA earns millions of dollars each year for maintaining the domain name registry — it has launched an annual Internet governance forum attended by hundreds of Canadians, partnered with various groups to help small businesses establish an online presence, and sponsored many Canadian Internet-related events. Yet just as CIRA begins to fulfill its potential as an “important public resource” (as described in its mandate letter from the Government of Canada), it has proposed a new governance structure that seeks to sideline the public by limiting the ability to serve on the CIRA board. With more than a million registrants, CIRA is one of Canada’s largest Internet organizations and its message to members is clear: we don’t trust you. One of CIRA’s requirements is to ensure “an appropriate balance of representation, accountability and diversity on the board of directors for all categories of stakeholders.” This has proven easier said than done. In the early years of the organization, there were several board positions reserved for specific stakeholders, including one position for the public, alongside the elected positions (I served six years on the board during this period). In its first governance overhaul, the reserved positions were dropped in favour of a dual election slate. A nominating committee was formed to identify potential board candidates, while CIRA’s members could seek nomination by obtaining the support of at least 20 other members. The resulting ballot included positions for both nominating committee candidates and member-nominated candidates. CIRA maintains that the process is too long and complex as it takes months to form the nominating committee, identify board candidates, and conduct the election. Moreover, participation has been relatively low, leading to concerns that candidates can get themselves elected to the board with the support of only a few hundred voters. While there is unquestionably room for improvement, CIRA’s plans, which are open for comment until May 2, makes matters considerably worse. The current proposal seeks to simplify the election process by eliminating member-nominated board members altogether. Canadians can be considered for a nominating committee position but the prospect of rallying support from the membership will be removed. The new process is certainly simpler — one ballot with a single list of candidates — but it comes at a high cost by diminishing public participation. Rather than seeking ways to encourage more Canadians to become engaged with managing the dot-ca domain, it hopes that increased backroom engineering of the board will lead to better governance. There are many ways CIRA could reform its governance process to address the complexity concerns without eliminating member-nominated board members. For example, nominating committee participants could be granted three-year terms (matching board member terms), thereby eliminating the two month process of filling that committee in most years. CIRA could also move to a single ballot by combining nominating committee candidates and member-backed candidates. That approach would address the confusion associated with the dual ballot and allow CIRA members to vote for the best candidates, regardless of the source of their nomination. To address concerns associated with board competence, it could require candidates to participate in several governance events prior to being eligible for election, thereby helping to ensure that newly elected board members hit the ground running. As CIRA grows and becomes increasingly important within the Canadian Internet, it should address concerns with board capture and election apathy. The starting point should be to increase the role of its members, however, not signal that they cannot be trusted. *Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can be reached at or online at www.michaelgeist.ca.* -- Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight Http://www.globalcatalysts.com http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] Consensus on NARALO showcase in Toronto
by gbruen＠knujon.com April 26, 2012

April 26, 2012

Yes, it should be replaced with another activity ------Original Message------ From: Gordon Chillcott Sender: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org To: Evan Leibovitch Cc: na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Consensus on NARALO showcase in Toronto Sent: Apr 25, 2012 15:33 The idea of an “open house” sounds intriguing – perhaps that one should be fleshed out a bit. I'd want to take a bit of care to make sure this doesn't morph into a “showcase”, though. Gordon On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 14:17 -0400, Evan Leibovitch wrote: > On 25 April 2012 13:49, Beau Brendler <beaubrendler(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > What I heard on the phone was something of a consensus that we should not > > have one, reasons cited including: > > * Showcase burnout > > > > Plus... hard to top Vint. > > > > * Few new ALSs to showcase joining NA since San Francisco > > > > Actually, I am fairly sure there aren't ANY new ones since SF. > > > > * Instead of a showcase should we do something that's more engaged with > > the public interest > > > > That's a good idea. Perhaps the concept of a NARALO "open house" that could > be promoted to the local NGO/NPO community. I have some contacts but I'd > probably need some help in getting the word out. As it is I've invited just > about every local facebook contact of mine to the event. > > > > * Should we concentrate instead on capacity building sessions or other > > > > Something that could link to the Academy, perhaps (assuming it happens)? > > > So I am going to start from the position that there's a consensus we should > > not hold a showcase in Toronto. > > > > That's my recollection from the call and I agree with it. > > FWIW, there is *not* going to be a EURALO showcase at Prague. So we won't > be the ones breaking the chain ;-) > > - Evan > ------ > 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 > ------ ------ 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 ------ Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

1 0

Meeting Invitation / Webinar for the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard
by At-Large Staff April 25, 2012

April 25, 2012

Dear All, Further to the Doodle poll, the Webinar on the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard is scheduled on Wednesday 02 May 2012 at 2100 UTC. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/7fv4f2s The agenda (TO BE UPDATED) and call details can be found here: https://community.icann.org/x/373bAQ Please let us know if you require a dial-out by emailing staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <applewebdata://E660C46A-5DE9-40D1-A578-1EC2840A07FC/staff@atlarge.icann.org > This call will only have Spanish interpretation. There was insufficient demand for French interpretation. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org From: Gisella Gruber <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 14:59:18 -0700 To: ALAC Announce <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: Gisella Gruber <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Subject: DOODLE / Webinar for At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard Dear All, Further to the ALAC call on Tuesday 17 April, and as agreed during the call, a webinar will be held on the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard the week of 30 April. Dev Anand Teelucksingh will provide a review of the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Draft+prototype+gTLD+Review+Das hboard> that will be used by At-Large to determine whether the ALAC should file objections to specific new gTLD applications. Please complete the attached Doodle poll to find a suitable time to schedule this Webinar. http://www.doodle.com/amemr52ygu2md8u7 If you require interpretation for this call, please note the language next to your name on the Doodle poll - example: "name" + (ES) or (FR).Interpretation will only be provided if there is sufficient demand. This Doodle poll will close on Wednesday 25 April 2012 at 2000 UTC. The date and time will be confirmed shortly thereafter. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Consensus on NARALO showcase in Toronto
by Beau Brendler April 25, 2012

April 25, 2012

Greetings. Pursuant to the last NA phone meeting, I said I would try to measure some consensus in the region as to whether we should plan and hold a showcase in Toronto, as we did (very successfully) in San Francisco. What I heard on the phone was something of a consensus that we should not have one, reasons cited including: * Showcase burnout * Few new ALSs to showcase joining NA since San Francisco * Do we (regional orgs) need to have a showcase every time there is a local ICANN meeting? * Instead of a showcase should we do something that's more engaged with the public interest * Should we concentrate instead on capacity building sessions or other So I am going to start from the position that there's a consensus we should not hold a showcase in Toronto. Please let us know over the next week or so if you would like NA to hold a showcase and we can consider the response.

5 5

Contact e-mail for Allan Skuce
by Beau Brendler April 25, 2012

April 25, 2012

Greetings. We (or at least I) have had trouble getting e-mails to our colleague Allan Skuce. Please use the following contact e-mail: allan.skuce(a)homesociety.ca Thanks Beau

1 0

Call for membership in the At-Large Technology Taskforce Working Group (TTF)
by ICANN At-Large Staff April 23, 2012

April 23, 2012

Dear All, Please find below a call for membership in the At-Large Technology Taskforce from the Chair, Dev Anand Teelucksingh. ** Dear All, One of the recommendations from the ALAC/At-Large Improvements Project Milestone Report dated 9 October 2011 (https://community.icann.org/x/fAW5AQ) is the establishment of an At-Large Technology Taskforce (TTF) The TTF will be responsible for several tasks, including: - periodically review the appropriateness of available technology, - help train RALOs/ALSes in new technologies introduced and possibly operate a help desk, - introduce to the ALSes selected information-dissemination, communication and collaboration tools and provide training, - assist with the development and implementation of the At-Large Social Media Outreach Strategy, - assist ICANN staff with the redesign of the At-Large website. Participation of the At-Large community and ALAC in policy discussions involves the use of a diverse amount of tools and technologies over the Internet. In turn, ALS representatives are expected to disseminate information within their ALS and to the general public. The At-Large community's understanding and effective usage of the various technology tools is important. A Technology Workspace has been created at https://community.icann.org/x/JZvbAQ which the TTF will maintain to help document the various technology tools and best practices and/or useful add-ons that would help At-Large members better use these tools. While the word "technology" in the working group name may imply that only persons well versed in technology need only apply, THAT IS NOT THE CASE. We're also seeking persons that are willing to evaluate various tools and share feedback. If you have any questions about the TTF and/or wish to join the TTF, please email ICANN At-Large Staff at staff(a)atlarge.icann.org by Monday, 30 April. The first call of the TTF will be held in early May 2012. Kind regards, Dev Anand Teelucksingh Chair of the TTF ** Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

The Guardian's Open 20: fighters for internet freedom
by Glenn McKnight April 23, 2012

April 23, 2012

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/20/twenty-fighters-open-inter… The Guardian's Open 20: fighters for internet freedom >From politicians and professors to computer scientists and the first programmer, champions of the open internet. -- Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight Http://www.globalcatalysts.com http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0

DOODLE / Webinar for At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard
by At-Large Staff April 22, 2012

April 22, 2012

Dear All, Further to the ALAC call on Tuesday 17 April, and as agreed during the call, a webinar will be held on the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard the week of 30 April. Dev Anand Teelucksingh will provide a review of the At-Large gTLD Review Dashboard <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Draft+prototype+gTLD+Review+Das hboard> that will be used by At-Large to determine whether the ALAC should file objections to specific new gTLD applications. Please complete the attached Doodle poll to find a suitable time to schedule this Webinar. http://www.doodle.com/amemr52ygu2md8u7 If you require interpretation for this call, please note the language next to your name on the Doodle poll - example: "name" + (ES) or (FR).Interpretation will only be provided if there is sufficient demand. This Doodle poll will close on Wednesday 25 April 2012 at 2000 UTC. The date and time will be confirmed shortly thereafter. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, and Nathalie Peregrine ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Don’t Be Evil, but Don’t Miss the Train
by Glenn McKnight April 22, 2012

April 22, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/technology/dont-be-evil-but-dont-miss-the… BACK in 2004, as Google<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html…> prepared to go public, Larry Page and Sergey Brin celebrated the maxim that was supposed to define their company: “Don’t be evil.” But these days, a lot of people — at least the mere mortals outside the Googleplex — seem to be wondering about that uncorporate motto. How is it that Google, a company chockablock with brainiac engineers, savvy marketing types and flinty legal minds, keeps getting itself in hot water? Google, which stood up to the Death Star of Microsoft? Which changed the world as we know it? The latest brouhaha, of course, involves the strange tale of Street View, Google’s project to photograph the entire world, one street at a time, for its maps feature. It turns out Google was collecting more than just images: federal authorities have dinged the company for lifting personal data off Wi-Fi systems, too, including e-mails and passwords. Evil? Hard to know. But certainly weird — and enough to prompt a small fine of $25,000 from the Federal Communications Commission<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/technology/google-is-fined-for-impeding-u…> and, far more damaging, howls from Congress and privacy advocates. A Google spokeswoman called the hack “a mistake” and disagreed with the F.C.C.’s contention that Google “deliberately impeded and delayed” the commission’s investigation. Many people might let this one go, were it not for all those other worrisome things at Google. The company has been accused of flouting copyrights, leveraging other people’s work for its benefit and violating European protections of personal privacy, among other things. “Don’t be evil” no longer has its old ring. And Google, an underdog turned overlord, is no humble giant. It tends to approach any controversy with an air that ranges somewhere between “trust us” and “what’s good for Google is good for the world.” But ascribing what’s going on here solely to the power or arrogance of a single company misses an important dimension of today’s high-technology business, where there are frequent assaults, real or perceived, on various business standards and practices. Mark Zuckerberg has apologized multiple times for Facebook<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/facebook_inc/index.ht…>’s changing policies on privacy and data ownership. Last year, he agreed to a 20-year audit of Facebook’s practices.<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/technology/facebook-agrees-to-ftc-settlem…> Jeffrey P. Bezos has been criticized for how Amazon.com<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/amazon_inc/index.html…> shares data with other companies, and what information it stores in its browser. And Apple<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/apple_computer_inc/in…>, even before it drew fire for the labor practices at Foxconn in China, had trouble over the way it handled personal information in making music recommendations. When such problems arise, executives often stare blankly at their accusers. When a company called Path was recently found to be collecting the digital address books of its customers, for instance, its founder characterized the process as an “industry best practice.”<http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/disruptions-so-many-apologies-so-m…> He reversed the policy after a storm of criticism. WHAT’S going on, when business as usual in such a dynamic industry makes the regulators — and the public — nervous? Part of Google’s problem may be no more than an ordinary corporate quandary. “With ‘Don’t be evil,’ Google set itself up for accusations of hypocrisy anytime they got near the line,” says Roger McNamee, a longtime Silicon Valley investor. “Now they are on the defensive, with their business undermined especially by Apple. When people are defensive they can do things that are emotional, not reasonable, and bad behavior starts.” But “Don’t be evil” also represents the impossibility of a more nuanced social code, a problem faced by many Internet companies. Nearly every tech company of significance, it seems, is building technologies that are producing an entirely new kind of culture. EBay, in theory, can turn anyone on the planet into a merchant. Amazon Web Services gives everyone a cheap supercomputer. Twitter and Facebook let you publish to millions. And tools like Google Translate allow us to transcend old language barriers. “You want a company culture that says, ‘We are on a mission to change the world; the world is a better place because of us,’” says Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and a venture capitalist with Greylock Partners<http://www.greylock.com/>. “It’s not just ‘we create jobs.’ A tobacco company can do that.” “These companies give away a ton of value, a public good, with free products like Google search, that transforms cultures,” Mr. Hoffman says. “The easy thing to say is, ‘If you try to regulate us, you’ll do more harm than good, you’re not good social architects.’ I’m not endorsing that, but I understand it.” The executives themselves don’t know what their powerful changes mean yet, and they, like the rest of us, are dizzied by the pace of change. Sure, automobiles changed the world, but the roads, gas stations and suburbs grew over decades. Facebook was barely on the radar five years ago and now has a community of more than 800 million, doing things that no one predicted. When the builders of the technology barely understand the effect they are having, the regulators of the status quo can seem clueless. Moreover, arrogance can come easily to phenomenally well-educated people who have always been at the top of the class. Success, though sometimes fickle, comes fast, and is registered in millions and billions of dollars. The world applauds, so it’s easy to see yourself as a person who can choose well for the world. In the “people like us” haze of the rarefied realms of tech, it’s easy to forget that, well, not everyone* is* like us. Not everyone is comfortable with the idea of sharing personal information, of living in full view on the Web. And, of course, ordinary people have more downside risk than a 26-year-old Harvard dropout billionaire. Another hazard is also one of the great strengths of the Silicon Valley: a tolerance of failure. Failing at an interesting project is seen as an important kind of learning. In the most famous case, Steve Jobs was driven from Apple, then failed in his NeXT Computer venture and for a while floundered at Pixar. But he picked up vital skills in management and technology along the way. There are a thousand lesser such stories. If tech is building a new culture, with new senses of the private and the shared, the failure of overstepping boundaries is also the only way to learn where those boundaries have shifted. It is a self-serving point, but that doesn’t mean it’s entirely wrong. To the outsiders, it can look a lot as if the companies are playing “catch us if you can” by continually testing, and sometimes exceeding, boundaries. IS there a better way? Mr. Hoffman says he thinks the tech industry has to acknowledge how much its products are shaping society. “We need something more than, ‘We’re good guys, trust us,’ ” he says. “There should be an industry group that discusses overall issues around data and privacy with political actors. Something that convinces them that you are good guys, but gives them a place to swoop in.” -- Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn(a)gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight Http://www.globalcatalysts.com http://newsocialmedia.wordpress.com

1 0