[bc-gnso] New Developments with implications for business and role of governments within ICANN

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

This week, two interesting developments in the road to determining more -or 
less intergovernmental influence or simply more governments oversight at ICANN 
took place. Some BC members are following these developments closely, but 
others may be just becoming aware, so I am calling these developments to BC 
members attention, and suggest that we include a discussion about this, in our 
preparation for ICANN 48, along with our work on policy priorities. 

There are undoubtedly some interesting views on how this move by the CEO of 
ICANN will impact ICANN focus and perhaps the implications or larger external 
agendas geopolitically that implicate business interests both within and 
external to ICANN. It is definately a shift away from the Crocker earlier hope 
that ICANN would stay narrowly focused on its own agenda and seek co existence 
with other players. 

What happened this week:
First, the I* organizations (ICANN, ISOC, IETF, IAB, RIRs, W3C) announced the 
Montevideo Agreement.  Members will have already read this on the ICANN front 
page of website and perhaps wondered what it meant, and why there was no 
consultation with ICANN stakeholders before such an announcement.

Then, just yesterday, the ICANN CEO/President flew to Brasil for a face to face 
with Brasil President and announced a new Summit to determine the fate and 
future of governance and oversight of ICANN and the IANA functions, stating a 
call for more governments to be engaged in governance of ICANN.

http://blog.planalto.gov.br/brasil-vai-sediar-encontro-mundial-sobre-governanca-da-internet-em-2014/

This email does not include my personal perspective on whether this is a wise 
strategy, but is an attempt to make other BC members aware of new developments.

What does this mean for the long run at ICANN in terms of focus on issues of 
priority to BC members is a good question.
Where did this come from, and how did it get so well developed, without a 
consultation with the broader community of stakeholders

I am just leaving the open consultation at the ITU on WSIS + 10 follow up, 
which of course, does include discussions about coordination fucntions, such as 
those performed by ICANN, but are much broader.  This process culminates in a 
high level event presently scheduled for Egypt, April 2014, following the two 
week ITU Development Conference.  Allies to the multi stakeholder approach to 
governance of the Internet public policy issues were successful at this just 
past meeting in resisting suggestions by a country -or three - to directly 
address IG, agreeing that these issues belong at Commission for Science and 
Technology, and at the IGF.  ICC-BASIS and USCIB are following the Open 
consultation closely, as well as some individual BC members, and both may have 
additional comments. 

I suggest that the BC membership, and leadership will want to be aware of the 
external activities driven by the CEO that call for a change in both oversight, 
a change in the role of governments within ICANN.  

Surprise announcements of this nature mean a lot of questions will develop.  

If anyone wants more details, I am happy to respond. 

Marilyn Cade