Page History
...
So my belief is that the two organizations will not be equal. But where we should be is quite far from the present situation. The Bylaws say the following regarding the Board<==>GAC relationship: h
h. The Board shall notify the Chair of the Governmental Advisory Committee in a timely manner of any proposal raising public policy issues on which it or any of ICANN's supporting organizations or advisory committees seeks public comment, and shall take duly into account any timely response to that notification prior to taking action.
i. The Governmental Advisory Committee may put issues to the Board directly, either by way of comment or prior advice, or by way of specifically recommending action or new policy development or revision to existing policies.
j. The advice of the Governmental Advisory Committee on public policy matters shall be duly taken into account, both in the formulation and adoption of policies. In the event that the ICANN Board determines to take an action that is not consistent with the Governmental Advisory Committee advice, it shall so inform the Committee and state the reasons why it decided not to follow that advice. The Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will then try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.
k. If no such solution can be found, the ICANN Board will state in its final decision the reasons why the Governmental Advisory Committee advice was not followed, and such statement will be without prejudice to the rights or obligations of Governmental Advisory Committee members with regard to public policy issues falling within their responsibilities.
The comparable section for the ALAC is:
a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee (“ALAC”) shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users
...
.
We are doing a far better job of acting as a Board Advisory Committee now than we were even a year ago. But it is essential that we work to ensure that the focus and quality of our “advice” is of such a high quality that it will be obvious to Board members that we deserve more formal acknowledgement of this enshrined in the Bylaws.
...
This question cannot be answered as it stands, because it is in error. The Bylaws explicitly state (bold emphasis mine):
Directors shall serve as individuals who have the duty to act in what they reasonably believe are the best interests of ICANN and not as representatives of the entity that selected them, their employers, or any other organizations or constituencies.
A Board must balance many viewpoints and needs, and I would be surprised if there were not occasional situations where the interests of users are overpowered by some other more compelling need. That is why one has advocates of specific needs in the organization – they can each represent their position but ultimately, a decision must be made and not everyone will be happy.
...
- Don’t merge the auction funds into general revenue.
- Do good things with it
- Since much of the revenue will likely be one-time-only and may not be repeated in later rounds, try to make it last
Within Within those constraints, I think that we should consider helping advance the Internet in developing countries (perhaps by subsidizing gTLD applications for some classes of applicants), advance the use of IDN, and a variety of education and fellowship opportunities. If the funds were sufficient, I would not object to allocating some to the operating reserve to get it to the desired level and not have it hanging over our heads forever.
...
I do not believe you can find a precise and definitive definition. I find the introduction to the Wikipedia’s description of “Public Interest” useful:
The public interest refers to the "common well-being" or "general welfare." The public interest is central to policy debates, politics, democracy and the nature of government itself. While nearly everyone claims that aiding the common well-being or general welfare is positive, there is little, if any, consensus on what exactly constitutes the public interest, or whether the concept itself is a coherent one.
In the context of ICANN, I think it perhaps refers to the interests of those who are not represented by those with a direct financial stake in ICANN matters. It can also be a reference to the state of the Internet as a whole, to the extent that we can put metrics on it - for instance, if there were a major Denial-of-Service problem, that would not be in the public interest.
...
I think my previous answer partially addressed this. ICANN is entrusted with overseeing the Internet Name and Number systems. This is a general resource not just to serve those who can lobby ICANN for what they want but for the rest of the world’s users as well. There used to be an old expression in the United States that goes:
What's good for General Motors is good for the country.
Perhaps it was once true in the US that what was good for big business was good for the nation, but it is certainly not true with respect to the Internet and the largest of the corporations that provide much of its infrastructure. ICANN is here to protect and enhance that infrastructure on behalf of everyone, not just the large contractors or businesses.
...
