<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Dear all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Many thanks to Peter for his remarks about
the importance of the conflict of interest issue and to Cheryl for the material
she has distributed. I wonder, however, if we are not making too much of it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Let's go back a second to what ICANN is
supposed to do and to the remit of the external review set up by the AoC.
ICANN is supposed to take a number of technical decisions about a "<i>scarce/essential
resource</i>", the DNS, in the interest of all the internet users (which
will coincide more and more with simply the interest of the world
population). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The RT is tasked with the objective of
examining if the organization of ICANN and its practice ensure the necessary
taking into account of all external inputs, if its decisions are taken in a
transparent way and if ICANN feels/is accountable to the Internet (world)
community for its decisions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Under these circumstances, what are the
situations that could generate a conflict of interest in the RT? I do not see
very obvious ones. More or less transparency, more or less accountability
will not, per se, favour one particular group of stakeholders over another.
All RT participants can be expected to genuinely desire an effective review
process independently of their position in the internet world. The only
difference of interest a critical observer might imagine is more of the type
"<i>ICANN insiders</i>" vs. "<i>ICANN outsiders</i>"; i.e.
some observers may fear that ICANN might not want to have more transparency and
accountability and might therefore be interested in frustrating attempts to
have an effective review. Such an observer might want to be reassured that
the RT identified the members who might be in a position that would incline
them in this direction. If we want to reassure the internet community on this
point, we need only to identify the existence of strong links – financial
or other - between the organisations to whom some team members belong and
ICANN. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>I do not see how the many issues raised in
the detailed questionnaire circulated by Cheryl would help. Our backgrounds,
our past experiences and present links are all spelled out in our CVs that have
been made public.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>The only clear conflict of interest
situation is one built into the system from the start, i.e. the position of
Peter, who might appear as "<i>making recommendations to himself</i>".
He is at the same time the highest representative of ICANN and a member of the
body that should make recommendations to ICANN. But he is an ex-officio
member of the RT. Perhaps, we should explain to the internet community how we
are going to deal with this situation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>All the best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB>Fabio<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE>Fabio </span><span lang=FR-BE
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Colasanti<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>36,
rue des Patriotes<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>B-1000
Bruxelles<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>tel.
+32 2 736 26 16<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>mob.
+32 488 14 24 05<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span lang=FR-BE style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>fabio@colasanti.it<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>