[CCWG-ACCT] GPI

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello Kavouss,

>>  1. Do you think that public interest of Community “A” is identical to those of country “B” or “C” or…?

No.

I think each country is likely to have its own definitions of the public interest that are often constructed as national laws.

I also think that there will be common public interests amongst countries - that are often developed into international treaties.   For example international conventions that relate to the laws of the sea:  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

 
. 
>>  2. Do you also think that the Public Interest of Country “ D” is identical to that of Countries “E “or “ F*,…?

No.


>>  3. Do you think that the Public Interests of those referred to in 1) and 2) above are stable within a period of time or it would change according to circumstances?   ,….

They will evolve over time just as laws evolve over time.   Some rules are more stable than others - for example the constitution of a country may change very rarely, whereas taxation laws may change frequently.

>>  4. Do you think that there is a way to have such a summation of all these different elements / categories to achieve what is called “GPI?

I think with respect to ICANN's mission - I think that it is possible to agree to a set of global public interests.

For example, that there is a unique, global root file for top level domain names, or that there is a global unique set of Internet Protocol addresses that is sufficient for all resources connected to the Internet.

 

>>  5. Do you also think that at the time of implementation, even if, and only if, we could have such a summation in an appropriate manner, there would a need to have a criterion/ criteria to determine whether or not such interests were met / observed?

I think much of what could be defined as the global public interest is already spread across the Articles of Incorporation, our current Bylaws, and the proposed changes in the CCWG report.

For example in the Articles of Incorporation it states that there is a global public interest served by    "coordinating the assignment of Internet technical parameters as needed to maintain universal connectivity on the Internet".



>>  6. Do you think that the human judgement/ interpretation at the time of implementation may be different?

Yes - I think human interpretation of a set of rules can change over time.

In our case the humans involved can include members of working groups, the staff, the Board, and the panellists sitting on an IRP panel.

I think we need to provide enough detail in our rules and procedures so that they can be followed by a new set of people.   Right now I suspect that we rely on a fair bit of knowledge and experience from people that were around at the time the Internet Protocols were first developed in the late 60's and early 70's.   In 20 years time - many of these people will be gone.



>>  There are many other questions of social, psychological, legal aspects of such definition and its scope of application.

Agreed.   I am only an engineer so most of these topics are well outside of my area of expertise.     I am thus honoured that you should ask my opinion on the global public interest.

I am still confident though that a set of principles can be developed to help further define the global public interest as it relates to ICANN's mission.   These principles can help guide those that join our community in the future.


Regards,
Bruce Tonkin