Proposal to Change ICANN Compliance Oversight
Dear colleagues, Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally. In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question. Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private. One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division. The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight. I have detailed the history and recommendations here: https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc e+-+January+2015 A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on _compliance.pdf A timeline of critical events is also posted here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR MACY_public.pdf I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO. Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list. -Garth ------------------------------------- Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com 617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen "If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
Garth has had a long history in making ICANN accountable and transparent on the compliance issue and I think NARALO needs to bring this issue into the policy realm. Glenn Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally.
In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question.
Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private.
One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division.
The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight.
I have detailed the history and recommendations here:
https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc e+-+January+2015
A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on _compliance.pdf
A timeline of critical events is also posted here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR MACY_public.pdf
I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO.
Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list.
-Garth
-------------------------------------
Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com
617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen
"If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
I agree that the issue is important. Thanks to Garth's tireless efforts, NARALO has a history of advancing these issues into ALAC policy positions. In this case, I agree with the substance and analysis but believe that the approach and tactics need some more discussion. I am more interested in an approach that effects change over one designed to score debating points. I invite NARALO members to comment on this proposal, I will be adding it to the agenda of our next NARALO call, and I will raise the issue at the Singapore meeting. - Evan On 28 January 2015 at 18:47, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Garth has had a long history in making ICANN accountable and transparent on the compliance issue and I think NARALO needs to bring this issue into the policy realm. Glenn
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally.
In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question.
Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private.
One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division.
The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight.
I have detailed the history and recommendations here:
https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc
e+-+January+2015
A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on
_compliance.pdf
A timeline of critical events is also posted here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR
MACY_public.pdf
I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO.
Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list.
-Garth
-------------------------------------
Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com
617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen
"If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
Thank you Evan, Glenn and Tom. Let me be clear, this is ultimately about a structural change from which all parties will benefit. I felt the weight of the recommendation required extensive documentation. Many people here, not just me, have spent countless hours trying to get these issues addressed, so lest any of that be forgotten, it should be part of the record. What we are observing is the nature of the beast: it is impossible for any entity to self-regulate above its own self-interest. Why do we see the results we see over and over? No other results are possible within the current architecture. This isn’t just an At-Large issue. I am very aware of domainers, registrars, and registries who feel the process is unfair. I’ve heard their stories and I sympathize. Put this alongside the fact that ICANN does not see itself a regulator and does not want to be. Its staff has plainly stated they don’t know how to conduct investigations or engage in the kind of enforcement that has been asked of it. What is not plainly written in the memo is an alternate view of the proposal which is that if ICANN considers domain sales its business, let it focus on that. Let it pour all its energy into increasing the domain space and then let an external structure monitor compliance and fairly arbitrate complaints. -Garth From: evanleibovitch@gmail.com [mailto:evanleibovitch@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:46 AM To: Glenn McKnight Cc: Garth Bruen; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Proposal to Change ICANN Compliance Oversight I agree that the issue is important. Thanks to Garth's tireless efforts, NARALO has a history of advancing these issues into ALAC policy positions. In this case, I agree with the substance and analysis but believe that the approach and tactics need some more discussion. I am more interested in an approach that effects change over one designed to score debating points. I invite NARALO members to comment on this proposal, I will be adding it to the agenda of our next NARALO call, and I will raise the issue at the Singapore meeting. - Evan On 28 January 2015 at 18:47, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote: Garth has had a long history in making ICANN accountable and transparent on the compliance issue and I think NARALO needs to bring this issue into the policy realm. Glenn Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally.
In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question.
Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private.
One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division.
The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight.
I have detailed the history and recommendations here:
https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc e+-+January+2015
A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on _compliance.pdf
A timeline of critical events is also posted here:
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR MACY_public.pdf
I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO.
Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list.
-Garth
-------------------------------------
Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com
617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen
"If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------ -- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
Dear Colleagues I fully welcome and support Garth Bruen’s efforts to place the essential elements of a successful compliance program for ICANN on the table. There is no doubt that a successful compliance program must be rooted in an endorsement by senior ICANN management as well as a solid foundation that includes a full analysis of oversight, standards and controls, risk assessment that is not just internal to ICANN but external as well, training and communication, and leadership. The bottom line is that as stakeholders, all of us are ultimately responsible for the corporate conduct of ICANN, including that of our board of directors. In light of the IANA transition, ICANN is under “international” scrutiny and as stakeholders we must do everything we can to reduce corruption and abuse risks, increase transparency, and present a high and added value for ICANN inclusive of compliance structures which we can help to determine. The systems and procedures must not only be capable of putting in place the monitoring of compliance but also the effectiveness of such compliance. Standards and controls are a normal part of business and I believe ICANN through this effort is being afforded an incredible opportunity to ramp up its standards and policies that are compatible and required with the enormous responsibility ICANN shoulders on behalf of the global public trust. Thank you, Loris Taylor Native Public Media
On Jan 27, 2015, at 1:15 PM, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally.
In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question.
Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private.
One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division.
The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight.
I have detailed the history and recommendations here: https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc e+-+January+2015
A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on _compliance.pdf
A timeline of critical events is also posted here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR MACY_public.pdf
I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO.
Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list.
-Garth
-------------------------------------
Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com
617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen
"If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
Thank you Loris, your support is important. As stated before my goal is to have this critical discussion which leads to an independent compliance function that serves all parties and users of the internet equally. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Loris Taylor <loristaylor1@icloud.com> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 17:38:43 To: Garth Bruen<gbruen@knujon.com> Cc: NA Discuss<na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>; April Tinhorn<atinhorn@nativepublicmedia.org>; Matthew Rantanen<mrantanen@sctdv.net> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Proposal to Change ICANN Compliance Oversight Dear Colleagues I fully welcome and support Garth Bruen’s efforts to place the essential elements of a successful compliance program for ICANN on the table. There is no doubt that a successful compliance program must be rooted in an endorsement by senior ICANN management as well as a solid foundation that includes a full analysis of oversight, standards and controls, risk assessment that is not just internal to ICANN but external as well, training and communication, and leadership. The bottom line is that as stakeholders, all of us are ultimately responsible for the corporate conduct of ICANN, including that of our board of directors. In light of the IANA transition, ICANN is under “international” scrutiny and as stakeholders we must do everything we can to reduce corruption and abuse risks, increase transparency, and present a high and added value for ICANN inclusive of compliance structures which we can help to determine. The systems and procedures must not only be capable of putting in place the monitoring of compliance but also the effectiveness of such compliance. Standards and controls are a normal part of business and I believe ICANN through this effort is being afforded an incredible opportunity to ramp up its standards and policies that are compatible and required with the enormous responsibility ICANN shoulders on behalf of the global public trust. Thank you, Loris Taylor Native Public Media
On Jan 27, 2015, at 1:15 PM, Garth Bruen <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following a multi-year analysis of the way ICANN handles its compliance function and being directly involved in the existing process every level I have come to the conclusion that some changes are required if ICANN is to actually be accountable and transparent. There are some fundamental problems within the organization which prevent compliance from operating in a truly independent fashion which serves all parties equally.
In short, ICANN compliance has been unable enforce the contract with registrars in specific cases and has been unable to explain why. Testing of the compliance process at every level has revealed technical failures, inconsistencies and lost complaints. Compliance staff failed to recognize violations for an extended period of time and later contradicted their own findings in later statements. The overall issue is we have been regularly assured that Compliance is not only fair but up to the challenges of an expanding Internet. Multiple discoveries call fairness and ability into question.
Through cases presented directly by At-Large to Compliance staff we stressed the importance of accepting patterns of abuse and not simply single complaints. While Compliance staff agreed to this on transcript in Singapore, they later rejected the same patterns of abuse in private.
One of the more problematic discoveries in this analysis concerns the oversight of compliance itself. As many of you are aware the current CEO moved compliance from under the Legal department to his direct supervision. This was seen by the community as a positive move. However, budget documents show that Compliance actually receives its funding from ICANN's Business division. Additional Compliance funds also still originate with Legal. Having the domain-business division fund Compliance appears to be an inherent conflict of interest and does not engender community trust. While we were told Compliance was being made more independent, this was not the case. It has also been revealed that the head of Compliance is the wife of a business associate of both the CEO and the head of ICANN's Business Division.
The main recommendation listed in the proposal is to move Compliance outside the organization. I am also recommending that the community become directly involved in Compliance oversight.
I have detailed the history and recommendations here: https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Reports+on+ICANN+Complianc e+-+January+2015
A formal memo to be forwarded to ALAC is here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/icann_alac_memo_on _compliance.pdf
A timeline of critical events is also posted here: https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/51417250/APPROVEDONLINEPHAR MACY_public.pdf
I am looking to move this agenda through At-Large starting within NARALO.
Please feel free to send any questions or concerns to me and discuss this on the list.
-Garth
-------------------------------------
Garth Bruen gbruen@knujon.com
617-947-3805 http://www.knujon.com Chair of ICANN At-Large North America (naralo.org) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/149/724 Twitter: @Knujon Skype: gobruen
"If history is deprived of the Truth, we are left with nothing but an idle, unprofitable tale" -Polybius
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
participants (5)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Garth Bruen -
gbruen＠knujon.com
-
Glenn McKnight -
Loris Taylor