[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Wrt (not) lobbying

[Seun Ojedeji]

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
wrote:

>
>
> So my interpretation would be that organizations who engage in lobbying
> activities (such as the examples given by Daniel) would not be ruled out
> as a matter of principle, but should commit and ensure that any funds they
> would receive from the ICANN Auction Proceeds would not be used in
> lobbying or political funding activities.
>

SO: Your interpretation seems quite accurate to me.

Regards

>
> Would that be correct ?
>
> Best,
> Mathieu
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Daniel
> Dardailler
> Envoyé : jeudi 23 mars 2017 18:54
> À : ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> Objet : [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Wrt (not) lobbying
>
> Hello all
>
> In the legal slides, lobbying is pointed out as a forbidden activity for
> ICANN and is loosely defined as "attempts to influence legislation".
>
> I'd like to understand exactly what that means.
>
> For instance, both IETF and W3C have been active in various European
> official fora (parliament, commission, national governments) to change the
> old EU legislation wrt public procurement so that procurers be allowed to
> reference our standards directly (e.g. IPV6 or HTML).
> This is clearly about legislation, and it's more than an attempt, since we
> eventually succeeded (look for the EU Multistakeholder Platform for
> details).
>
> Is this sort of policy oriented work to make the Internet and the Web
> technologies more "official", and therefore better deployed, without
> fragmentation, considered lobbying ?
>
> Let's take another example. Suppose that some governments want to pass a
> brain-damaged legislation related to IP routing. Shouldn't ICANN be
> allowed to inform the public authority about the risks of doing just that
> ? If ICANN doesn't do it, who will ?
>
> This is not a rhetorical case, every year or so, I get alerted by some
> advocacy groups that "deep linking" is about to become illegal somewhere
> on the planet (a deep link is just a link to a page "inside" another site,
> bypassing their "home" page) in order to protect some publisher business.
> Such an approach would undermine a fundamental piece of the Web
> architecture: freedom to link anywhere, and if we, the technical
> community, don't explain that point to policy makers, who will ?
>
> There are dozens of public policy topics that are directly related to the
> Internet and the Web. They are all technical in nature of course and they
> only exist because of the net, because of us. As it happens, these topics
> are not very "hot" in the technical community, mostly because of their
> "policy/legal" flavor (not geek enough), so it's already difficult to find
> resources to represent our point-of-view.
>
> My point is: at this point in time in Internet history, with lots of
> legislators trying to control the net without much of a clue of how things
> work, I think it would be a strategic mistake from the Internet technical
> community to self-censored itself in these debates.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170327/ca4b339d/attachment.html>