Re: [NA-Discuss] GNSO reform and ALAC

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wendy and all,

  In point of opinion and supported by some historical
fact, it's worse than a farce, it's a travisty of the
lowest order.  But than again the GNSO sense the ill
concieved idea of effectively dissolving the GA, hasn't
been representative of anything but perdominantly 
the commercial sectors.  But of course that's understandable
as those are the consitituencies that pay ICANN the most,
now arn't they?  And so, and even if, ICANN is susppose to
be a 501 c(3) calif. corp. ICANN's staff and especially
its bod knows whom is buttering it's bread so to speak, eh?

  And for these amongst other already many times articulated
reasons, our members will not support (read drink the cool aid)
of some of not many commercial entities that have forced or
significantly over influenced ICANN policy agenda and direction, 
namely again, Google, Wikipedia, RIAA and all or most of it's 
members, MPAA and/or all of it's members, the BC and/or much
of it's members, and of course the IPC and most of it's quite
errant members with our $$ or other currency as is appropriate.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Apr 23, 2008 7:09 AM
>To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Cheryl Langdon-Orr 
><cheryl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NA Discuss <na-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] GNSO reform and ALAC
>
>What a farce.
>
>Whether or not the document is any good, I saw no consultation with ALAC
>that would support the claim that "The attached document is a unique
>collaboration of the joint users groups
>represented within
>ICANN today:
>The At-Large Advisory Committee
>The Commercial and Business Users Constituency
>The Intellectual Property Constituency
>The Internet Service and Connection Providers Constituency
>The Non-Commercial Users Constituency."
>
>--Wendy
>
>Danny Younger wrote:
>> Evan,
>> 
>> The ALAC has participated in a joint statement without
>> any consultative engagement with its own membership; 
>> such behavior should not be countenanced -- the final
>> Statement is posted here:
>> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00012.html
>> 
>> regards,
>> Danny
>> 
>> 
>> --- Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> For reasons that are unclear to me, there is a
>>> document being drafted on
>>> a proposed revision to the GNSO to allow for some
>>> sort of "public"
>>> representation that has come up with some very
>>> strange conclusions. Here
>>> is an early draft of the document:
>>>
>> http://www.ipconstituency.org/PDFs/Position%20to%20Board%20on%20GNSO%20Reform.pdf
>>> A more recent version of the draft has essentially
>>> gutted ALAC's role
>>> and calls for some sort of direct participation by
>>> ALSs. The truly
>>> amazing thing is that this is being advanced as
>>> having the support of
>>> ALAC itself! 
>>>
>> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ispcp/msg00413.html
>>> Compounding the problem is that the closing of
>>> public comments is this
>>> week -- and the fact that the document is still in
>>> flux!! How can "the
>>> public" adequately address a moving target in this
>>> manner?
>>>
>>> Frankly, not only the document but the process that
>>> has produced it is
>>> flawed to the point of causing distress. I've now
>>> heard from Beau and
>>> Wendy (who have sopken up on the internal ALAC list
>>> -- why is it being
>>> debated there?) and Danny (in personal contact with
>>> me). I am asking one
>>> or more of you to help craft a NARALO position that
>>> we can submit this
>>> week. I will do my best to help but I will likely be
>>> incapacitated for
>>> most of the rest of this week because of surgery.
>>>
>>> Both the document (at least in its current form) and
>>> the process that
>>> developed it IMO should not be submitted as
>>> something with widespread --
>>> let alone universal -- public support. Can some
>>> folks here please get
>>> together to draft something upon which NARALO can
>>> get a consensus
>>> statement and submit before the deadline?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> - Evan
>>>
>>>
>>> ------
>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>>> NA-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>>> ------
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>       
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
>> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>> 
>> ------
>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>> NA-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> 
>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>> ------
>> 
>> 
>
>
>-- 
>Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law
>Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
>http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
>http://www.chillingeffects.org/
>https://www.torproject.org/
>
>------
>NA-Discuss mailing list
>NA-Discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>------

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827