2 November 2010

This document lists the passages from the Final Report of the ALAC Review WG on ALAC Improvements (“Final Report”; 9 Jun 2009) that pertain to ALAC/At-Large’s continuing purpose within ICANN. 

The passages are organized in two different ways:

Within the Simplified Outline, the continuing purpose of ALAC/At-Large is summarized by Recs. 1, 10, and 11.  These recommendations (whose language is easily identified in the passages excerpted in this document) follow:

Rec. 1:  ALAC has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure with four key elements:

  • Providing advice on policy;
  • Providing input into ICANN operations and structure;
  • As part of ICANN’s accountability mechanisms; and
  • As an organizing mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach.

The section of the ICANN Bylaws that deals with ALAC should be changed to reflect this purpose.

Rec. 10:  ALAC as the representative body for At-Large is the primary organizational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN processes (though ICANN's multi-stakeholder model provides opportunity for individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process).

Rec. 11:  There needs to be a clear statement from the Board that recognizes the place of At-Large as the primary organizational home for individual Internet users and that clarifies the relationship between ALAC and the User Home currently being developed within the GNSO.                                                    

________________________________________________________________________

Part 1:  All passages regarding ALAC/At-Large’s continuing purpose – organized as they appear in Final Report (note that Final Report formatting is retained here)

Final Report, p. 6:

2. Summary: Final Report - Key Points

  1. The ALAC has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure.  This continuing purpose has four key elements:
  • providing advice on policy;
  • providing input into ICANN operations and structure;
  • part of ICANN’s accountability mechanisms
  • an organising mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach

The section of the ICANN Bylaws that deals with ALAC should be changed to reflect this purpose.

Final Report, pp. 7--8:

Does the ALAC have a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure?

The WG has developed its response to the Westlake report with the underlying principle that ALAC does have a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure as the primary organizational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN.  There has been considerable debate about whether the “individual Internet user” is the appropriate focus of ALAC attention.  In the context of this document, the WG believes that an Internet user is a human being who is materially affected by the Internet either directly through use of an Internet browser or similar interface, or indirectly through the use of services that run over Internet protocols.  With another two doublings of Internet usage, every human being will be an Internet user and therefore the terms “Internet user” and “human being” are converging.  The WG has adopted this broader definition (rather than, for example, registrant) because it believes that many of the policies developed through the ICANN process, while often technical in nature, have an impact on individual users of the Internet.  It is their voice and their concerns that need to be included and heard in the ICANN process.

The ALAC serves the following four purposes within the ICANN structure: advice on policy development; input into ICANN operations and structure; as one aspect of ICANN’s accountability mechanisms; as an organizing mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach activity.

Providing advice on policy is a critical aspect of ALAC’s role.  This is the role of ALAC as described in the ICANN Bylaws.  The WG absolutely supports this view as ALAC’s primary role.  For this to be successful, there must be robust processes within ALAC for providing policy advice which accurately reflects the views of individual Internet users.  In addition, the policy development processes in other parts of ICANN must be structured in such a way that the views of the individual Internet user are requested and acknowledged.  There are multiple policy arenas where the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be heard.  The GNSO Policy Development Process is probably the area where the ALAC is most likely to be providing input.  However, there may well be occasions where ALAC may wish to provide advice on matters before the ASO and ccNSO. 

The second important aspect of ALAC’s role is providing input into ICANN’s operations and structure.  ICANN is now a much larger organization with more developed institutional processes than was the case at the time of the formation of ALAC.  ICANN’s planning processes, while still evolving, are now reasonably well established.  As the vehicle for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user, ALAC needs to have input into these planning processes.  Similarly, ALAC needs to contribute to the organizational structure discussions that are taking place as ICANN undertakes reviews of the Board and the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees.  The voice of the individual Internet user is an important input into this process.

The third aspect of ALAC’s role (although in some senses the most important) is as part of ICANN’s accountability processes.  As the key representative of the individual Internet user in the broader ICANN process, ALAC should have a voice in the mechanisms being developed through the President’s Strategy Committee and other mechanisms to provide greater accountability.  Although the exact shape of these mechanisms is not yet decided, the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be included as an important part of any mechanism that is developed.

The fourth purpose that ALAC serves is as the organizing mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach activity.  Through ALAC’s interactions with the ALS structures, ICANN is able to reach out to thousands of Internet users across the globe.  As such, ALAC has an important role to play in coordinating and facilitating some of ICANN’s outreach activity.  The At Large Summit being held in conjunction with the Mexico meeting is an excellent example of this type of activity.  This outreach may also extend to capacity building as At Large activity coordinated through ALAC educates Internet users on the issues that underlie policy and other debates in the ICANN arena.

This discussion of purpose focuses on the needs and interests of the individual Internet user, and ALAC through the RALO and ALS structure is the primary organizational home for those voices.  In addition to individual user voices, there are in many places organized groups which represent the interests of consumers, in some places with official standing or government support and usually with a mission focused on consumer protection.  While the ALAC does not represent these voices, there may be merit in including them more formally in ICANN’s processes.

Final Report, pp. 16--17:

3.2.2.4     Involvement of individual users in other parts of ICANN

The WG believes that ALAC is the primary organisational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user, although individual users may choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process.

The WG acknowledges that an individual may have several perspectives on ICANN issues and therefore may wish to participate in ICANN in several ways.  One individual might wish to contribute to ICANN processes as a business owner through the Business Constituency, through the IP constituency as a lawyer and as an individual Internet user, through the ALAC.  It is important not to confuse the possibility for an individual to contribute in several places because of these different perspectives with the need for the individual’s participation as an individual Internet user to have an organisational home.

The WG also believes that there is a difference between the inclusion in the ICANN process of input reflecting the concerns of individual users (for which the primary organisational home is At Large), and the inclusion of input from organisations that operate on behalf of individuals. Bona fide consumer protection groups are an example of such an organisation.  In the opinion of the WG, ICANN should seek to include in the ICANN process such organisations whose mandate is to protect the interests of individuals.  Such groups might choose to be part of the At Large as an ALS.  Another logical place for including them might be as a constituency or part of a constituency within the GNSO[.]

Implementation of significant GNSO Improvements is now under way, including the consideration of the role of individual Internet users in the GNSO, and those efforts should be coordinated with the ALAC leadership.  It is possible that the creation of a User House within the GNSO may create competition for membership of individual users.   One of the strengths of the ICANN multi-stakeholder model is the freedom it creates for individuals to choose how they would like to participate.  The WG supports this principle and encourages users to participate in the ICANN process in the way that best meets their needs.

The WG suggests that there needs to be a clear statement from the Board that recognises the place of At Large as the primary organisational home for individual users, and that clarifies the relationship between ALAC and the User House currently being developed within the GNSO.

Final Report, p. 21:

Recommendation 11 [of precursor Westlake report, not within Simplified At-Large Improvements Outline]

That the term of appointment of the ALAC Chair should be extended to two years.

The WG supports this recommendation, subject to the “right of recall” according to the ALAC Rules of Procedure.

______________________________________________________________________

Part 2:  Subset of passages cited under Recs. 1, 10, and 11 in Simplified Outline -- organized by the recommendation tasks citing them
 

Task 1.1:  Amend Bylaws Article XI, 2(4)(a) to clarify purposes, as proposed

  • Final Report p. 6, par 1:

Summary: Final Report - Key Points

  1. The ALAC has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure.  This continuing purpose has four key elements:
  • providing advice on policy;
  • providing input into ICANN operations and structure;
  • part of ICANN’s accountability mechanisms
  • an organising mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach

The section of the ICANN Bylaws that deals with ALAC should be changed to reflect this purpose.

 

Task 1.2:  Review proposed IIC/post-JPA accountability mechanisms to ensure congruence with recommendation

  • Final Report, p. 8, par. 2:

The third aspect of ALAC’s role (although in some senses the most important) is as part of ICANN’s accountability processes.  As the key representative of the individual Internet user in the broader ICANN process, ALAC should have a voice in the mechanisms being developed through the President’s Strategy Committee and other mechanisms to provide greater accountability.  Although the exact shape of these mechanisms is not yet decided, the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be included as an important part of any mechanism that is developed.


Task 1.3:  ALAC Engagement in ICANN Structural Improvements Programs

  • Final Report, p. 7, par 4:

The second important aspect of ALAC’s role is providing input into ICANN’s operations and structure.  ICANN is now a much larger organization with more developed institutional processes than was the case at the time of the formation of ALAC.  ICANN’s planning processes, while still evolving, are now reasonably well established.  As the vehicle for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user, ALAC needs to have input into these planning processes.  Similarly, ALAC needs to contribute to the organizational structure discussions that are taking place as ICANN undertakes reviews of the Board and the Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees.  The voice of the individual Internet user is an important input into this process.


Task 1.4:  Extend ALAC Chair term to two years

  • Final Report, p. 21:

Recommendation 11 [of precursor Westlake report, not within Simplified At-Large Improvements Outline]

That the term of appointment of the ALAC Chair should be extended to two years.

The WG supports this recommendation, subject to the “right of recall” according to the ALAC Rules of Procedure.


Task 11.1:  Statement from Board that clearly recognizes At-Large as primary ICANN home of individual Internet users and clarifies relationship between ALAC and GNSO's User Home

  • Final Report, p. 17, pars. 2--3:

Implementation of significant GNSO Improvements is now under way, including the consideration of the role of individual Internet users in the GNSO, and those efforts should be coordinated with the ALAC leadership.  It is possible that the creation of a User House within the GNSO may create competition for membership of individual users.   One of the strengths of the ICANN multi-stakeholder model is the freedom it creates for individuals to choose how they would like to participate.  The WG supports this principle and encourages users to participate in the ICANN process in the way that best meets their needs.

The WG suggests that there needs to be a clear statement from the Board that recognises the place of At Large as the primary organisational home for individual users, and that clarifies the relationship between ALAC and the User House currently being developed within the GNSO.

  • No labels