Protest regarding the CWG charter and working methods

["Richard Hill" <rhill@xxxxxxxxx>]

I refer to the call for observers to join the Cross Community Working Group
(CWG), posted at:

  https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2014-09-26-en

And to the charter of that group, posted at:

  http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/iana-stewardship-naming-function-charter-1
4aug14-en.pdf

The charter fails to note that the NTIA called for the IANA stewardship
function to be transitioned to "the global multistakeholder community",
which is broader than the existing ICANN constituency.

It also fails to note that the IETF and the RIRs have responded to the
NTIA"s call and to the formation of the ICG by creating fully open processes
to discuss the transition.

In contrast, the CWG, while stating that it will adhere to the principle of
opennes, has in fact created a two-tier structure, with decision-making
power being restricted to a specific group of stakeholders, namely those
currently involved in the domain name business.

There is of course nothing wrong with a subset of stakeholders conducting
consultations and presenting proposals, so I have no objection to the CWG
per se and I am not prejudging the output of the CWG.

But it is not a process that is truly open to the global multistakeholder
community.

Therefore I will not participate as an observer and I reserve my right to
send comments directly to the ICG, pursuant to the ICG charter, regarding
the output of the CWG.

Sincerly,
Richard Hill