Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] ALAC statement on the GAC scorecard

[Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Eric,

Thank you so much for this detailed briefing... it will take me some time to
become familiar with it and your point of view.

What I find interesting with Foundations in general is how their endowment
capital was put together and the motivations for doing so (fiscal before
philanthropic?). I suspect that, in general (not seen research on it
though!), monopolistic super-profits are often, if not always, at the origin
of many of these family fortunes. Industrial revolution fortunes on the US
East Coast and now IT revolution and digital revolution fortunes on the US
West Coast all have their origins in incredible profit making!!! ...good
ideas acted upon smartly create huge profits!

Certainly ICANN, does not fit that pattern.... if only because it is a
not-for-profit multi-stakeholder organization... (Bill Clinton's central
argument in his SF speech). In any case, I need to become familiar with the
history of ICANN... I suspect, like the UN, if ICANN did not exist, it would
have to be re-invented (the Ted Turner argument when he gave $1 billion to
start the UN Foundation). The alternative of a government-controled only
internet, for me, is a kafkaesque nightmare scenario!!!!

Again, thanks for participating in my ICANN education!!!!

Alain

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams <
ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Alain,
>
> ICANN is not the average not-for-profit corporation incorporated in
> California and found qualified by the IRS to 501(c)(3) status. It is (and
> here is a deep spot where one can arrive at delegated rule making authority
> [1][2], or simply observe "no statutory authority" [3], or recite a
> "multi-stakeholder" credo [4], or other snakepits [5]) "charged with"
> something to do with several things, but most relevant to the question of
> how it is funded, transforming a series of monopoly contracts, valued at
> $21bn in 2000, when Network Solutions was acquired by Verisign.
>
> I view ICANN's adoption of the "cost recovery" framework for the 201x round
> of new gTLDs as a brilliant success by Verisign's team, as the incumbent
> monopolist pays nothing to create competition, and incidentally, is allowed
> to "compete" with new market entrants on "equal terms".
>
> Having been intimately involved with the process prior from the SRI
> contract period to the present, with 2005-2006 spent ignoring ICANN until
> contacted by the NomCom of 2007, I view Verisign as still holding a
> monopoly, and successful in channeling the creation of its "competition" to
> commercially negligible fringe activity.
>
> I'm not saying that a development campaign shouldn't closely resemble
> development campaigns to achieve specific ends, and financial assistance
> (don't forget regulatory (or contractual, depending on what side of the deep
> spot, above, you favor) relief, as well as technical and other forms of
> assistance) should not be granted as PRIs. What I am saying is that ICANN is
> not disinterested, and it has a complex, monitized, relationship with
> Verisign.
>
> So some intellectual distance vis a vis the rationals offered by it for its
> budgets are consistent with participation seeking to identify and advance
> one or more public interests.
>
> Eric
>
> [1] See "WRONG TURN IN CYBERSPACE: USING ICANN TO ROUTE AROUND THE APA AND
> THE CONSTITUTION", Michael Froomkin, 50 Duke L. J. 17 (2000).
>
> [2] See "A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR FROOMKIN: WHY ICANN DOES NOT VIOLATE THE
> APA OR THE CONSTITUTION", Joe Sims and Cynthia Bauely, 6 J. Small & Emerging
> Bus. L. 65 (2002).
>
> [3] Verbatim comments of Anna Gomez, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
> Communications and Information, and Deputy National Telecommunications and
> Information Administration (NTIA) Administrator, at M. Cade's "meet the
> industry" function, February, 2009.
>
> [4] See any ICANN staffer, and most contracted parties satisfying the
> property noted in the Affirmation of Committments (AoC) of membership in “a
> group of participants that engage in ICANN's processes to a greater extent
> than Internet users generally”.
>
> [5] The usual ICANN-is-teh-evil cabalists.
>
>


-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Vice-Chair, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
Vice Chair, Canadian Foundation for the Americas - www.focal.ca
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger