[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Towards a comment on evolving the multistakeholder model at ICANN

Marita Moll mmoll at ca.inter.net
Tue May 21 18:06:22 UTC 2019

If anyone would point me to the two white papers that Evan mentions in 
his message below, it would be a useful addition to our submission to be 
able to reference these.


On 5/18/2019 4:37 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> Evan, as much as some people (and I count myself among them) feel that 
> the overall ICANN model needs to be changed to address the types of 
> issues you list in your bullet points below, that is not what this 
> exercise is about.
> As the name implies, this is _evolution_ to increase the effectiveness 
> of the current model and not a complete reorg. That may make it less 
> than useful in the minds of some, but that is what it is.
> It is not the only such exercise going on. There is one purely within 
> the GNSO which addresses some of these same problems but has the 
> potential for worsening some things (including participation of 
> non-GNSO groups/entities which some view as impeding the PDP process).
> Is this current process sufficient to address the larger problems? No 
> (in my mind). But can it provide useful change without increasing the 
> overall structural problems? I hope so.
> Alan
> At 18/05/2019 01:58 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>> Hi Marita,
>> I apologize for not making the call. I am very interested in this 
>> topic, but even more interested in not having my time wasted.
>> As has been expressed before, I am extremely skeptical that the 
>> status quo can be disrupted purely from the inside.  There have been 
>> quite a few exercises of this kind before, even high profile moves 
>> such as the ATRT and independence from the US government have been 
>> tortuous but led to little real change in the way decisions are made. 
>> I could even make the case that the IANA transition has worsened the 
>> status of stakeholders outside the compact of domain buyers and 
>> domain sellers. What is the assurance (or even broad confidence) that 
>> the results of any new work would be heeded?  What are the 
>> consequences to ICANN of yet again ignoring the calls to distribute 
>> power more broadly or address its many fundamental breeches of public 
>> trust?
>> There are a few key components of ICANN governance that, so long as 
>> they exist, render all talk of real change aspirational at best.
>>   * So long as GNSO consensus policy binds the ICANN Board, the rest
>>     of us are essentially powerless.
>>   * So long as ICANN's revenue comes solely from domain acquisition,
>>     it is by definition in a conflict of interest in setting domain
>>     policy.
>>   * So long as domain sellers sit on both sides of the negotiating
>>     table in development of the RAA and other instruments of domain
>>     regulation, ICANN cannot be trusted to act impartially.
>>   * So long ICANN is accountable to nobody but its core conflicted
>>     community, it will successfully resist change. "Empowered" my eye.
>> ALAC has diligently participated in multiple previous "fix the MSM" 
>> efforts which have yielded no significant result. Two white papers 
>> produced by ALAC members were ignored without so much as 
>> acknowledgement of their existence. In this context, exactly how 
>> serious is this latest iteration? A new turnover of ALAC members 
>> provides fresh hope and maybe even new insights, but lack of 
>> institutional memory simply indicates new iterations of old efforts 
>> that have proven to fail. We hit the most solid of walls whenever 
>> intention tries to turn to execution.
>> This just feels so much like ICANN is Lucy and ALAC is Charlie Brown. 
>> Maybe if we try kicking the football again, this time it will work.....
>> What's different this time?
>> - Evan
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>> _______________________________________________
>> registration-issues-wg mailing list
>> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20190521/8ad2b89a/attachment.html>

More information about the CPWG mailing list