Subject: Question 4
From: avri@acm.org
Date: 2010-06-14 18:13:05 GMT
Received: from 61.113.174.133
Revision: 3
4. What is your general assessment of ICANN's commitment to the interests of global Internet users? Can you provide a specific example(s) when ICANN did not act in the interests of global Internet users? If so, please provide specific information as to the circumstances and indicate why you believe ICANN's actions were not taken in a manner consistent with the interests of global Internet users.
From Avri:
ICANN's primary focus is still primarily focused on supporting those who can make money on GTLDs and on assuaging the anger of a few governments and not on the global Public Interest. For example, there is still a great imbalance 3:1 in the GNSO between those who represent business and those who represent the Non commercial interests.
In terms of an event, I believe that the preference that the ICANN staff clearly gave to getting out IDN ccTLDs over IDN gTLDs, including reports (again always difficult to report without revealing sources from with the ICANN blanket of secrecy) that there was a guarantee that the IDN ccTLDs would be in the root 6 months before any new gTLD were allowed in the root. The clear way in which the staff hustled to overcome the IDN ccTLD issue while languishing through the creation of the so-called Overriding Issues to slow down the new gTLD process was a way to meet international pressure from governments at the cost of competition and freedom in the creation of IDN gTLD by the same populations who are not receiving the IDN ccTLDs.
I hope that the Review Team has the ability to dig into any and all email archives and to question staff members (past and present) under guarantees of personnel immunity on events that occurred over the past years in managing to push the fasttrack , which started long after the new gTLD policy, at least 6 months ahead of new gTLDs
Because they are allowed to act secretly in these as well as other respects, it is impossible to know exactly what they are doing. In addition to eliminating the ability of the Staff to work in secret, there should be whistle blower programs and protections to encourage those staff members who see problems to report them publicly without fear or retribution.
contributed by avri@acm.org on 2010-06-14 17:47:04 GMT
