WCIT webinar



1.  Introductions (Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC & Nigel Hickson, VP Europe, Global Partnership)

2.  Background to WCIT  - Nigel Hickson (see attached BGRC Paper from April and a Paper from Patrick Ryan)


    Why potentially important to ICANN


    Proposals so far   (see Table)

    WCIT meeting – where is ICANN?

    Likely outcome?



3.  What next - (Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC & Nigel Hickson, VP Europe, Global Partnership)




Nigel explained the ITU and role of the ITU. The document explains what will be debated in Dubai.

Yaovi: If meeting is organized according to the rules to review the Treaty or because of the impact of the Internet today is why it has been organized.

Nigel explained the history of the process of amending the ITU rules. Parties to the ITU treaty can review the rules but once the process is started its very difficult to stop. The Council WG has made a proposal and there will be proposals made by individual member states and by regional groups. The process that will be used will be discussed in Dubai, and those proposals changing the ITU R will be discussed in one group, another issue in another group, etc. There will be an attempt to reach a consensus to agree on what ITU R should look like in the future. There has been speculation that the whole concept may fail, but usually these discussions reach a compromise and such compromise perhaps has changes or not.

December session is for Member states.

That does not stop their interest, WG will be set up in individual groups.

You may ask what relevant this has to ICANN?

If you look at the proposals at the moment, it would be fair to say that there has been hardly any proposal that touch ICANN core.

ISOC is a member of ITU and a number of Regional Internet registries are also sector members in the debate.

These are the background issues


We have the WSIS review which is very important,  which took place in 2003/2005 which established the Tune Agenda which recognized the ICANN model in relation to Internet Governance. In 2015 the model will be reviewed. The Agenda should be revised. Many people would not want that. There are a number of countries which much prefer the issue of internet governance.

Alejandro Pisanty [question to be posted]


One of the problems of the particular discussions is that the amendment of the Treaty, is amending the set of regulations. Member states are sovereign and therefore the proposed text is not of the liking of countries, then a country can say no, but no individual country can stop the ITR coming into effect. If that individual party does not sign the ITR then it would not affect the particular country, but affect all others which agreed to it.

ITU and UAE there will be compromises, so that everyone can say it was a success.


OCL: The US government has made it known that it would fight back to bring the Internet under these regulations.

Nigel: Whether internet is integral part of telecom and this was discussed in the EU. One could envisages the situation within one includes within the scope of the ITR, doesn’t ot include internet because there is nothing in the regulations,  but some say scope of the ITRs include the internet.

Solution may be that it includes telecom in some way.


OCL: If some country recognizes that internet is included in  ITR and some don't, might this cause the brake up of internet ? and would that result in some countries recognizing ICANN and some don't recognizing ICANN?


Nigel this will not effectively break the internet, it will have  some rules, for example Russia made a proposal that it would be possible to interferes with international traffic if  this threatens the sovereign of a country, because any country could claim it.



Wolf: Is the WCIT not a symbolic...

Some people argue that because the ITRs were drawn up at different times, then they are not viable at all,

Erick: There are 2 text referenced....{read aloud]

Alejandro:   They have been participating in the process and that it would be useful to intervene in the public consultations.

Victor: The ITU is a member state org, and we also have in ICANN the GAC, what do we do to influence country's decisions via de GAC?

This is a good question, but as ICANN staff we do not have control over the agenda and clearly this is for the GAC itself and its for the GAC Chair whether they want to discuss these issues.

    The GAC plays an important role in the ICANN community and within the community we should be discussion and would be quite logical for the GAC to discuss by Toronto. Perhaps the GAC should be discussing one of the issues.

Carlton: On behalf of Evan L, who is making the connection made by Alejandro,

We have heard in this talk about the lack of respect (or lack of appreciation) in WCIT for ICANN's multi stakeholder model. Yet in building a strategy for defending ICANN's relevance and advancing its benefits compared to a state-run model, ICANN is neglecting and in effect ignoring the active participation of its community. Most action is to be undertaken by ICANN staff, in consultation with industry (!) but not with the extensive end user community that is a visibly unique feature of ICANN's internal processes. How can ICANN defend the MSM on the global stage if it doesn't have enough confidence in this community to actively engage it in its response to the ITU/WCIT?

Nigel: We have heard this in Prague and everyone can influence your government and I certainly do not undervalue the users community.

OCL: These ALS have connection with government and many are disappointed that ICANN does not recognizes their voice.

Yrjo L: I would like to echo what Alejandro a OCL said about including the governments. These things should be multi-stake holder based.

Nigel: WCIT has encouraged national preparations and this is very useful indeed.

Evan: Carlton will read

Is this a webinar with Q & A as supposed to strategy planning? Is there a plan to improve this process?

OCL : This is an intro to the subject as next steps, it is for Nigel.


OCL: Will At Large be involved in all of this?


AI: Staff to take questions on the chat and we will send them to Nigel.



We are not heard by staff and the Board itself. I will try to bring your voice.  One of the parameters is why these conference calls are important.


OCL: Suggested to schedule a call later on in the month.

Another call would be very helpful for us and ICANN.




  • No labels