[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG list summary, Jan 30 to Feb 5

[Mr R.T. Daniel]

Thinking out loud.
So is there any mileage in having an icann A & icann B.
"A" board = public interest & contract co.
"B" board private non profit implementing Board A 's ..policy frameworks....etc...etc..
Board B answerable to board A?
RD

Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

>Hi,IamnotsureigetthedistinctionaboutICANNbeingprivateorganisation,doesitmeanthereisalsoproblemwithallRIRthataresetupasanot-for-profitorganisationlikeICANN.Ithinkthefactorsyouindicateaselementsofmultistakeholderismareadequatelycoveredwithinthepublicinterestphrase.Whatmattersmostforanon-legalindividuallikemeisthatialwayshavetheopportunitytoparticipateinthepolicydevelopmentprocessthatwoulddeterminehowigetservedbyICANN.Solongasigetthat,myrightsarecoveredandmultistakeholderismwillbefelttobeinaction.Regards OnThu,Feb19,2015at5:16PM,RobinGrossrobin at ipjustice.orgwrote:TheproblemisthatICANNisaprivatecorporationanditisengaginginpublicgovernancefunctions. Thequasipublic-privatestructurecreatesachallengebecauseifitwereatraditionalgovernment,itwouldberequiredtorespecthumanrightsintheperformanceofpublicgovernancefunctions,andsomearguethatbecauseitisaprivatecorporationithasnoobligationtorespectrights(yearsagoICANNslawyersarguedinthexxxcasethat,asacontracteetotheUSGovt,itwasobligatedtoprotectfreeexpression). Sothetraditionalframeworkbreaksdownbecausewevegotaprivatecorporationundertakingpublicgovernancefunctions,butwithoutthetraditionalprotections(respectinghumanrights)intheperformanceofthosepublicfunctions. Ifthisholeisnotplugged,themulti-stakeholdermodelisinadequateforInternetgovernance. Out-sourcingpublicgovernancefunctionstoprivatecorporationsisfine,solongaswedontlosetheprotectionsaffordedbypublicgovernanceinstitutions.  IfthereisnodutytoprotectfreeexpressionandprivacybythoseorganizationswhosetpoliciesgoverningtheInternet,wevetakenastep-backwardwithmulti-stakholderism,althoughitisnottoolatetofix. Atitscore,whatImarguinghereisthatICANNshouldrespectfreespeech,privacy,anddueprocessrightsinitscarryingoutofitspublicgovernancefunctions,sowhenICANNmakesapolicy,itdoesntderogatefromthefundamentalrightsaffordedtoInternetusersintraditionalgovernanceinstitutions. IfICANNwantstoengageinpublicgovernancefunctions,itmustacceptpublicgovernanceresponsibilities.Best,RobinOnFeb18,2015,at4:36PM,GregShatanwrote:Carlos:Nobodysreducinganything.Firstoff,theFirstAmendmentisreallyirrelevanttothisdiscussion,aswonderfulasitis. Itpreventsthefederal governmentfrommakinglawsabridgingfreedomofspeech,freedomofthepress,freedomofassemblyorrespectinganestablishmentofreligion. WearenottalkingaboutactionsoftheU.S.governmenthere,andICANNhasneverbeenconsideredapartoftheU.S.government. TheFirstAmendmentdoesnotapplytoprivateentities. SotheFirstAmendmentreallyhasnothingtodowiththisconversation,otherthantoconfuseit.ICANN,asaprivateentity,hasneverbeensubjecttotheFirstAmendment,sonothingschanginginthatregard. Furthermore,itsinaccurate,misleadingandunhelpfultorefertothisasaprivatization. TheprivatizationoftheInternet,ifsuchathingcaneverbesaidtohaveoccurred,occurreddecadesago. ThestewardshipoftheUSgovernment,whilebroaderthantheIANAFunctionsthatareatthecoreofthatstewardship,neverextendedinanywaytoapplyingFirstAmendmentprotectionsorprohibitionstoICANNsaction,muchlessmakingICANNanarmofthestate.Also,nothingschangingwithregardtoICANNsobligationtoperforminthepublicinterest. ICANNspublicinterestobligationsdomakeitdifferentfromprivatefor-profitentities. AdoptingaCorporateSocialResponsibilityprogramandpolicywouldnotinanywaydiminishorreplaceICANNspublicinterestobligations. Rather,CSRpolicieswouldcomplementandactasa(non-exclusive)manifestationofICANNscommitmenttothepublicinterest. A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150219/840fd66d/attachment.html>