[IANAtransition] [IANAxfer] Global public interest in Internet identifieradministration...

Alejandro Pisanty apisanty at gmail.com
Sun Apr 6 13:56:23 UTC 2014


Richard,

data point: no, ICANN is not a monopoly. It does not sell goods or
services. It is no more a monopoly than the entities mentioned in many of
the later discussions, like the RIRs or those in charge of the uniqueness
of credit and debit card numbers, ISBN book numbers, and other, similar
identifiers.

You can quote me in your forthcoming book. In the corresponding paragraph
you will please substitute "as we know" for "as, despite knowing better,
some continue to say."

Alejandro Pisanty


On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:

> John,
>
> I agree with you that one has to identify specific areas where there might
> be public policy concerns.
>
> In addition to the ones you outline below, competition policy is probably
> such an area.  As we know, ICANN is a monopoly.  So either you create
> competition, or you supervise it.
>
> Regarding the issues you refer to below, no, there is no global agreement,
> which is why we are having so many discussions.  But that implies that
> those
> issues should never have been brought into the DNS.  That is, we should
> have
> avoided technical decisions that resulted in the creation of global issues
> that are insoluble at the global level.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ianatransition-bounces at icann.org
> > [mailto:ianatransition-bounces at icann.org]On Behalf Of John Curran
> > Sent: dimanche, 6. avril 2014 14:29
> > To: michael gurstein
> > Cc: Ianaxfer at Elists. Isoc. Org; ianatransition at icann.org
> > Subject: [IANAtransition] Global public interest in Internet
> > identifieradministration...
> >
> >
> > On Apr 5, 2014, at 5:45 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Surely the major difference between the credit card numbering
> > system and the
> > > Internet numbering system is that with credit cards folks are
> > able to decide
> > > whether or not to use credit cards and many people in the world are
> > > completely unaffected by credit cards and will remain so for
> > the foreseeable
> > > future.  With the Internet for significant parts of the world,
> > being able to
> > > effectively access and use the Internet is becoming for many purposes
> > > effectively compulsory i.e. there are easily accessible
> > alternatives and the
> > > significance of the Internet including for many of those not
> > actually using
> > > it (they are economically, socially, culturally etc. connected to
> > > individuals or institutions who are using it) is now or rapidly
> becoming
> > > pervasive.
> >
> > I agree with the above statement regarding the importance of the
> > Internet...
> > over at 1net discuss, in updating the problem statement, I noted
> > it as such -
> >
> >  "The values in the Internet registries (particularly in the case of the
> >   general-purpose identifier registries, i.e. DNS space and IP address
> >   spaces) underlie the Internet itself, i.e. one of the most significant
> >   technological developments with far reaching social and economic
> impact.
> >   It's not possible to foresee all of the various manners in which the
> >   Internet will affect the life of everyone globally in the coming years,
> >   and hence we need to adopt proactively a set of principles that will
> >   insure that everyone has an opportunity to understand and participate
> >   in administration of the underlying identifier system."
> >
> > > What that means I think, is that there is a (global) public
> > interest in how
> > > Internet numbers are handled/administered/governed whereas for
> > credit card
> > > numbers that interest is to a considerable degree sectional. So
> > the question
> > > of how that "public interest" is made effective/operative has to be a
> > > consideration in these discussions.
> >
> > While agreeing with your observation about the importance of the
> Internet,
> > I question your assertion above that such an importance
> > automatically raises
> > a "global public interest" in the _administration of Internet
> > identifiers".
> >
> > I believe that the importance of the Internet does creating an
> > overarching
> > need that everyone has an opportunity to understand and participate in
> > administration of the underlying identifier system, but when it comes to
> > "global public interest", I do not believe that such automatically exists
> > regarding the administration of Internet identifiers, instead noting that
> > the "global public interest", lies with the overall successful operation
> > of the Internet (which is a very different statement.)
> >
> > Automatically equating the importance of the Internet into a
> > "global public
> > interest" in the administration of Internet identifiers (simply because
> > the identifiers are necessary for its operation) is faulty logic,
> > and would
> > require us also to define a global public interest a priori in the many
> > other activities, for example, in the manufacturing of fiber optic
> cables,
> > the design of the hardware and software of your desktop computer, and the
> > design of IETF protocols; as all of these are necessary for success of
> the
> > Internet as well.
> >
> > There is definitely high potential for public interest aspects in
> specific
> > parts of the Internet identifier system (as folks have noted with
> > respect to
> > DNS names, context, marks, etc.) but such instances when
> > encountered need to
> > be carefully exhumed, and then noted to governments to see if
> > there exists
> > any corresponding global standard or norm on the matter which
> > would allow for
> > a global framework for solution.  To otherwise declare some form
> > of enveloping
> > "global public interest" in Internet identifier administration
> > only serves to
> > significantly encumber the development and advancement of the
> > Internet, and
> > thus deprive the global community of the very social and economic
> > benefits
> > that one is trying to protect.
> >
> > FYI,
> > /John
> >
> > Disclaimer: My views alone.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ianatransition mailing list
> > ianatransition at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ianatransition
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> IANAxfer mailing list
> IANAxfer at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaxfer
>



-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ianatransition/attachments/20140406/5ccb1bae/attachment.html>


More information about the ianatransition mailing list