<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
ACT Comments on the Final Recommendations of the ATRT
- To: "atrt-final-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx" <atrt-final-recommendations@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: ACT Comments on the Final Recommendations of the ATRT
- From: Jonathan Zuck <jzuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:20:46 +0000
Comments of Jonathan Zuck, President of the Association for Competitive
Technology on the ATRT Final Report
The Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) is a trade association
representing nearly 4,000 small and medium sized IT firms around the world and,
for the most part, our membership have no interest in internet governance, or
so they thought. Internet governance is dominated by firms and individuals with
either a direct commercial or academic interest in these processes, and our
membership falls into the category that believe "if it ain't broke, don't fix
it." To our membership and to the huge majority of internet users, the DNS
system and, by extension, the governance of that system, appeared to be working
and therefore required no attention.
In 2005 perceptions changed as the media picked up on those with "intentions"
for ICANN in the international community. Our very first intervention at an
open board meeting was in Vancouver when we reported "if you had asked our
membership a year ago how ICANN was doing, they would have responded 'What's
ICANN?' but today you see a whole lot of people walking around in 'ICANN
Rocks!' t-shirts. As a result, in addition to our work on IP issues, ACT's
primary focus has been on strengthening the organization from the inside and
defending it from the outside. Just as in business, stronger organizations are
less susceptible to hostile takeovers.
The world is watching ICANN more closely than ever before, and the stakes have
never been higher. With the historic signing of the Affirmation of Commitments,
ICANN is truly an independent organization. National governments and
intergovernmental organizations like the International Telecommunications Union
are actively seeking to wield greater influence in DNS management and Internet
oversight. ICANN's best defense against this encroachment remains the steadfast
support of its community, which encompasses industry, civil society, and even
many in government. But a linchpin of that support has always been the
assertion that the ICANN process reflects the will of the Internet community.
We know that ICANN's detractors are following the review process with great
interest. Should ICANN fail to rise to the challenge of implementing the ATRT
recommendations, detractors will use that failure in their efforts to seek
greater control over ICANN.
The Affirmation of Commitments Accountability and Transparency Review process
was a bold experiment in the finest tradition of ICANN. Stakeholders from
throughout the community came together under a tight deadline to address one of
the biggest challenges facing ICANN. The review team worked through resource
limitations, time constraints, and the challenge of creating an entirely new
process to not only fulfill its charter, but also to blaze a path for future
teams.
In many ways, the final product of the ATRT process represents the perfect
ICANN document; not because everyone agrees on its findings - quite the
contrary - but because it synthesizes an incredibly diverse set of inputs into
a clear, actionable set of recommendations. By any reasonable measure, the ATRT
has exceeded expectations in bringing the inaugural AOC review to a successful
conclusion.
If there is one criticism to be lodged against the final ATRT report it is that
it is perhaps a bit myopic. There is more to accountability and transparency
than mechanisms for accountability and transparency. When speaking of building
secure software, you will often hear the term "secure by design," which means
that for software to be truly secure it needs to be designed with security in
mind from the outside, not just subject to security mechanisms which are
applied after the fact. True accountability at ICANN requires understanding
those objectives to which the organization is being held accountable. The more
concrete the organizational objectives, the easier to measure its success and
failures and seek procedural improvements.
Accordingly, while ACT applauds the ATRT recommendations regarding metrics in
the implementation of accountability and transparency measures as well as the
board's resolution requiring metrics to measure the success of new gTLDs,
metrics are essential across the organization for ICANN to be truly transparent
and accountable. There need to be metrics surrounding internal processes; there
need to be goals and metrics on contract compliance, diversity, etc. Even more
abstract objectives such as raising community or governmental confidence in
ICANN can be measured through participation and surveys. What gets measured,
gets done.
That said, the herculean effort by the ATRT must be rewarded by action. While
the work of the ATRT may be done, the work of the ICANN staff and board of
directors has just begun, and their responsibility to the ATRT process is even
more significant than that of the review team itself. Now that the ATRT has
produced consensus recommendations for how ICANN should strengthen its
accountability and transparency processes, the burden falls to ICANN to
implement those recommendations without prejudice and in a timely fashion.
The AOC is unequivocal about the board's responsibility regarding the ATRT
findings. The Affirmation states "the Board will take action within six months
of receipt of the recommendations." But at the most recent meeting in
Cartagena, ICANN President Rod Beckstrom seemed to indicate that the board and
staff would pick and choose which recommendations to implement and when, based
on constraints of time and budget. While later comments by ICANN leadership
seemed to back away from this assertion, the episode only furthered the
impression that ICANN is not fully committed to the ATRT process.
The biggest unanswered question about ICANN in the eyes of the global community
is whether the organization possesses the will and the capacity to make
difficult but necessary changes to strengthen its accountability and
transparency to stakeholders. ICANN has long insisted that it is responsive and
accountable to the ICANN "community" and requires no additional oversight. If
this is truly the case, ICANN will act quickly and without prejudice to
implement the recommendations of the ATRT. The ATRT indisputably represented
the will of the ICANN "community" in the area of accountability and
transparency. If ICANN fails to implement the changes developed by a
community-driven process that it helped create, it will raise serious questions
as to whether the organization is capable of demonstrating real accountability
to anyone.
ICANN has never lacked for ideas on how to improve its accountability and
transparency. For the past several years - dating back long before the ATRT -
members of the community have offered an array of practical and creative
solutions for improving the manner in which ICANN responds to the input of its
global community. The ATRT built on and refined those efforts into the most
cohesive and balanced set of recommendations that ICANN has yet seen. But until
ICANN takes decisive action on the ATRT findings, they remain just another set
of unrealized good ideas. And ICANN may be running out of opportunities to
demonstrate its capacity to improve.
The ATRT may not be a perfect document, but the ICANN process does not demand
perfection. Rather, it demands a commitment to continued dialogue, community
engagement, and improvement. In that respect, the ATRT has met and exceeded its
charter. ICANN must now take up the baton and demonstrate to the world and its
own community that it is committed to strengthening its processes. ICANN Rocks.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|