<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">On Aug 11, 2016, at 7:35 AM, parminder <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" class="">parminder@itforchange.net</a>> wrote:<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Monday 08 August 2016 04:26 PM, John
Curran wrote:<br class=""><div class=""><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class="">
<blockquote cite="mid:B875D747-DBA3-4A92-B081-C096E3DE3551@istaff.org" type="cite" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<font face="Verdana" class="">snip</font>
<div class="">
<div class="">Parminder - </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> ICANN by its function is not a "public
governance body” - it is actually a coordination </div>
<div class=""> body that supports the stable and secure
operation of the Internet’s various identifier </div>
<div class=""> systems.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Thanks for your response John. I dont see why the latter (Internet
identifier coordination) cannot be or isnt a subset of the former
(public governance) . More specifically, I dont see how, for
instance, allocation of a generic language term, of immense cultural
value, .book, as privately owned gTLD to Amazon, in complete
violation of the spirit of trademark laws, is not a public
governance or public policy issue. <br class="">
<br class="">
OECD <a href="http://www.policy-community.eu/results/glossary/public-governance" class="">defines
Public governance </a>as "<span style="text-align: justify; " class="">"the
formal and informal arrangements that determine how public
decisions are made and how public actions are carried out, from
the perspective of maintaining a country’s constitutional values
in the face of changing problems, actors and environments" . (You
may just have to change from 'country's' to the 'world's' to talk
about a global public governance function.) Are ICANN decisions
and actions not public decisions and public actions? <br class=""></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>ICANN and its community undertake decisions that affect those who make use of the</div><div>Internet identifiers in question. There are still a billion plus people on the planet who</div><div>do not do so, and ICANN has no ‘governance’ function with respect to them, yet your </div><div>use of the “public governance body” would lead many to assume otherwise (due to </div><div>the traditional role of public authorities in public governance)</div><div><br class=""></div><div>While I recognize that the use of the Internet is pervasive, it is not clear that one can </div><div>equate its coordination with “public governance”, as the latter term is heavily overloaded</div><div>with meaning from its usage in authoritarian decision making structures, both within </div><div>individual states and on a multilateral basis. </div><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class=""><span style="text-align: justify; " class="">I dont see how the most important and contested functions of ICANN
are of not a public governance nature. If it is were only doing
some technical management, maybe 30 people sitting is a small
office somewhere could have achieved it rather well, rather than
this whole big juggernaut that we know ICANN to be. <br class=""></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>It’s certainly a coordination function, but again, your use of the term “public governance” </div><div>is readily misunderstood for more classical modes of governance. While you cite the </div><div>OECD, it’s equally easy to find definitions of “public governance” such as this - </div><div><br class=""></div><div> <i class="">"What is public governance? - Public Governance is about the exercise of public authority by state governments aimed at generating rules and regulations and delivering services to a community of citizens.” </i>(Basel Institute on Public Governance, <<a href="https://www.baselgovernance.org/theme/public_governance" class="">https://www.baselgovernance.org/theme/public_governance</a>>)</div><div><br class=""></div></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class=""><span style="text-align: justify; " class="">Also note that ICANN's charter speaks about its raison d'tre to be
of </span><span style="text-align: justify; " class=""> '</span><span class="st"><em class="">lessening</em> the <em class="">burdens</em> of <em class="">government
'</em></span><span style="text-align: justify; " class=""> which clearly
makes its work to be of public governance (and its implementation)
nature. ((I know this term is used specifically to claim tax
exemptions, but I am sure this cannot be a false claim.)</span><span class="st"><em class=""></em></span><br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>You cannot equate “lessening the burdens of government” with actual performance of </div><div>governance - it may be the case, but is not clearly and inevitably so. If that logic were</div><div>true, then “The United Nations lessons the need for warfare” would equate to “The work </div><div>of the United Nations is clearly warfare…”</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class=""><blockquote cite="mid:B875D747-DBA3-4A92-B081-C096E3DE3551@istaff.org" type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="">
</div>
<div class=""> This does not in any way impinge on your main
point: i.e. that ICANN should operate</div>
<div class=""> under very high transparency requirements –
only that it should do so because such</div>
<div class=""> transparency was a basic tenet of its
establishment and remains so to this day.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
So, if I paraphrase and extrapolate rightly, you are saying that
ICANN is just whatever it says it is, and that is it. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>For purposes of this group’s WS2 activities,I believe that ICANN is public benefit corporation </div><div>which helps ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems </div><div>via specific coordination activities. If you see some other framework into which ICANN belongs,</div><div>it would be best to elucidate on that point and make sure that the ICANN community believes</div><div>the same.</div><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class="">… No external
cannons of public propriety - like transparency, accountability, etc
can be applied to it. It is sui generis and sovereign in its
constitution. </div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I do believe defining its transparency and accountability structures are inherent to the activities </div><div>of this working group. That does not preclude having additional standards of transparency and</div><div>accountability applied to its activities, only that the authority for any additional standards is not </div><div>readily apparent (unlike the legitimacy of structures that the ICANN community defines for such </div><div>purposes.)</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>/John</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Disclaimer: my views alone.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>