[AT-Review] Draft summary of public comment

Brian Cute briancute at afilias.info
Mon Aug 9 14:00:43 UTC 2010



In addition to Peter's comments, please note I realize my request to have
suggested edits for the summary in by C.O.B. Friday was aggressive.  If you
have read comments and have suggested edits that you have not yet offered,
please do so.





From: Peter Dengate Thrush [mailto:peter.dengatethrush at icann.org] 
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 3:01 AM
To: briancute at afilias.info
Cc: at-review at icann.org
Subject: Re: [AT-Review] Draft summary of public comment


Thanks Brian, for circulating these.


For some of you this public comment process may be new, or this may be a new
level of involvement.

It is instructive to read the comments and to try to understand the
background and origin of the comments.Recourse to the original submission is
often helpful.


There are always those who take the opportunity to fight other battles -
including the lost ones of the past;

IPC: The public is not adequately represented in the governance model,
including the Board. business and intellectual property community should
have a substantial role on the Board and the governance structure should be


and it may be the first time for some of us that one's own transparent and
independent processes get re-characterized:

This system, in which ICANN reviews itself, is clearly biased and ICANN
answers to no one but contracted parties. A recent example is the request
for an "independent expert" for its Accountability and Transparency Review.
ICANN is choosing its own researcher to assess its decision-making to
determine if it is aligned with the principles of the AoC. Doing this
creates an inappropriate relationship between ICANN and the experts


Others are just factually wrong:

The Board decided to launch the new gTLD program, in spite of concerns by
GAC that its principles were not fully reflected 


(The new gTLD programme has not yet launched, and efforts are underway to
understand and deal with GAC concerns)


It makes winnowing out the useful comments and recommendations more
difficult, but is an instructive exercise.








On Aug 5, 2010, at 5:40 AM, Brian Cute wrote:



Attached is a draft summary, prepared by Olof Nordling, of public comments
received to date in response to the ATRT's questions to the community.
Please read, if you have not already, the public comments received.  If you
have any suggested edits to the draft, please send them to the list.  If you
could do so by close of business on Friday, August 6 that would be




<ATRT Summary of Comments v1
AT-Review mailing list
AT-Review at icann.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/at-review/attachments/20100809/ded2e977/attachment.html 

More information about the AT-Review mailing list