[IFWP] ICANN captive of Jones/Day !?
FYI: http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/diary/sept-17-2002.htm ... as the result of my win in my lawsuit against ICANN I have seen materials that give me great pause - my confidence in the abilities of ICANN's management is not very high. In fact my confidence in ICANN's management, which has never been high, has reached an all time low. I believe that ICANN's board ought to remove certain ICANN executives and officers from their duties for insubordination and incompetence. I also believe that ICANN has become a captive of the law firm that created ICANN and that has become ICANN's largest creditor. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Services http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "If we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
[IFWP] Fwd: A Note about WLS from Clint Page
FYI: >Over the past few weeks we've been keeping you updated on the domain name >wait listing service (WLS) proposed by VeriSign and SnapNames. I wanted to >let you know that last Friday, ICANN voted yes on adoption of the proposal. >They voted yes, even though the ICANN WLS Task Force soundly rejected its >adoption. They voted yes, even though the outpouring of angry consumer >voices on the ICANN WLS forums and petitions clearly demonstrated that not >many were in favor of its adoption. Despite our best efforts to lead a >charge against this proposal, it has been accepted, and we must do our best >to move forward with it now. > >Many of you have shown your support of open competition in the secondary >market by e-mailing me, signing the anti-WLS petition, and posting comments >on the forum. From all of us at Dotster, thank you so much for your >support. Dotster is currently going through the appeals process, so we >remain optimistic that things will work out in favor of consumers. Whatever >ends up happening in the end, I promise that Dotster will try to work >within the new system to bring the most benefit to you, our customer. > >I have put together a comprehensive document outlining the history of the >WLS proposal, from its first introduction until last week's vote. The >document also includes information on which registrars voted for and >against the WLS -- the results may surprise you! I invite you to review >this document by visiting http://web.dotster.com/resources/wlsresponse.php. >Also, if you have any questions or comments about the decision, please feel >free to e-mail them to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Again, thank you for your continued support. > >Clint Page, President >Dotster Inc. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Services http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "If we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
[IFWP] The Illusion of Legitimacy
== >Newspeak, committees, learning curves -- these and a host of other tactics >have been the stuff of the ICANN policy process. While such dissimulation >used to cause outrage, it is increasingly a source of wry amusement. As US >Congressman Ed Markey said, "Although ICANN is supposed to be a >consensus-based organization, the irony is that the only thing it has >achieved global consensus on is that it is a failure." [7] > >Over time the tactics of illusion wear thin. Today, ICANN is widely >recognized for what it is: a top-down policy-making institution that >regulates important areas of the Internet. It is not particularly >transparent, accountable, or representative. The people who run ICANN may >honestly believe that this is how it should be; that is not the issue >here. The issue is that ICANN attempts to make its processes look >different than what they are. Expressions of concern about "participation >by the full range of Internet users" are inconsistent with a demonstrated >commitment to top-down decision-making. > >In particular, the ALOC (or its new sub-committee) is emerging as the >latest attempt to create the illusion of legitimacy. With its staff >vetoing language deemed unacceptable, the ALOC seems likely to produce a >result acceptable to the ICANN board. At that point ICANN's board may >announce that it has finally discovered the true voice of the user. > >### > >References >= >[1] Markle Foundation, "A Pluralistic View of DNS Governance: Core >Principles for ICANN Reform," Statement for the Record to the Senate >Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on >Science, Technology, and Space, Hearing on ICANN (June 12, >2002) http://radio.weblogs.com/0108486/misc/icannstatementfinal-markle.doc >[2] From the ALOC home page. (The language is quoted from an ICANN Board >resolution. See note 4, below.) http://www.at-large.org/ >[3] Charles Costello, ICANN Public Forum in Accra, Real-time Captioning, >13 March >2002. http://www.icann.org/accra/captioning-afternoon-13mar02.htm (To >find the quote in this lengthy document, search on "palace coup.") >[4] ICANN Board Resolution, 14 March 2002, "ALSC Report and At >Large." http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-14mar02.htm >[5] NAIS: http://www.naisproject.org/ ICC: http://www.icannmembers.org/ >[6] Froomkin, Michael, presentation at "The Public Voice in Internet >Policy Making," 22 June 2002, sponsored by the Electronic Privacy >Information Center (EPIC). http://www.thepublicvoice.org/events/dc02/ >. For Markey quote, see note 7. For Costello quote, see note 3. >[7] Markey, Edward, (US Congressman), quoted in the Washington Post and >Access Global Knowledge, 20 June 2002. >http://access.globalknowledge.com/Article.asp?ID=3904 > > >= > >CYBER-FEDERALIST is a series of analyses and commentaries >on Internet governance and ICANN produced by the >Civil Society Democracy Project (CivSoc) of >Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR). >See: > http://www.cyber-federalist.org (archive) > http://www.civsoc.org > http://www.cpsr.org > >The author of the CYBER-FEDERALIST is Hans Klein. > >Subscribe to the CYBER-FEDERALIST! >Send an Email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >= > >### > > > > > > > +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Services http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "Seeker: How can I find the path? Teacher: Learn to walk, and the path will find you." -- The Zen of Global Transformation, Nasrudin O'Shah
[IFWP] Noreena Hertz on Globalization
contract, this idea that government and citizens together have a relationship to provide public goods, a sense of community, a better world. The social contract has been privatized, has been handed over to the private sector to safeguard with incredible conflicts of interest. Scientific research. Scientific research, something that, you know, we want to be able to trust, to believe in, increasingly being funded by private corporations. When the FDA tried to remove saccharine off the list, or decided to remove saccharine off the list of cancer inducing chemicals, its work was based on the findings of the University of Nebraska researcher who was funded by Sweet and Low. MOYERS: And therefore... HERTZ: And therefore the conflict is we can't even trust the information we now receive. We need to have much clearer regulations on things like corporate funding of scientific research. Things need to be made explicit which are implicit. We don't want the takeover. We shouldn't allow the takeover to be kept silent any longer. MOYERS: Have you been out to any of the protests? The protest in Seattle or Genoa or in Quebec? HERTZ: Yeah. I was-- the last protest I was at was in Genoa, where I got tear gassed and I hate tear gas and I hate being in crowds. But... MOYERS: Why were you there? HERTZ: Because I'm really supportive of the protest movement, because I think it's capable of changing the political agenda and because we already see signs of its success. In Europe, Guy Verhofstadt, the President of the European Union when he was, talked about a need for global binding agreements on ethics in the environment. He hosted a one-day session last October to which he invited me-- other people who are seen as voices of the movement, but also Bill Clinton. MOYERS: Have you seen any evidence though, Miss Hertz, that the protests are actually making a dent... HERTZ: Yes. MOYERS: ...in the market ideology, the globalization that girdles the world now? HERTZ: Yes. I see it in terms of changing political rhetoric in the United Kingdom. Gordon Brown, our Chancellor of the Exchequer, his willingness now to double Britain's aid to least developed countries. I see it on the lips of every CEO of every big company I see today. They're all saying we cannot ignore the voices of this protest movement. One third of CEOs of big multinationals polled say that they view the anti-globalization movement as a serious threat. MOYERS: Who's on the side of those people in Bolivia? HERTZ: The people in Bolivia unfortunately only have each other, but the international activist community is doing something in keeping their story alive. As we saw in the film, it's an activist who through the Internet and using technology for globalization in a positive way managed to get the story of Bolivia across to very many constituencies. MOYERS: A Bill Finnegan goes there, the mass media pay no attention to that sort of thing. HERTZ: And that is the tragedy of our times. That's the tragedy of a public information environment that is increasingly being commercialized. It's so hard to get those kind of stories on the airwaves. Broadcasters are so desperate for ratings, for advertising revenues, but they don't really wanna run stories about the poor somewhere else, or even for home. MOYERS: Is that why you say in your first chapter, "The revolution will not be televised"? HERTZ: The revolution may not be televised, but word of the revolution is getting out. MOYERS: I was gonna say you're too young to be a pessimist. Are you a pessimist? HERTZ: Oh, no. I'm very optimistic. I think that we already see signs that the world is changing. I think in the context now in the United States of Enron, of Tyco, of Adelphia, that 75 percent of Americans who already thought that big business had too much influence over their lives is beginning to say, "You know, hey. Maybe it's not such a good thing that these big corporations are running amok." So I think we're seeing a ground swell dissent and we're seeing the mainstreaming of a lot of these ideas. MOYERS: Well, thank you very much for joining us on NOW and thank you for THE SILENT TAKEOVER. HERTZ: Thank you. +++ This message is from the Aligning With Purpose Extra list. Please send subscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED], unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED], or check out the website at http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Services http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "Whenever two or more people secretly plan an illegal act, we have a conspiracy. By that definition, there is no doubt that a conspiracy was committed on 9/11. How big a conspiracy, remains to be seen."
[IFWP] EFF Responds to ICANN
confidential >or privileged" is already subject to his independent fiduciary duty under >law and he has never indicated that he intends to "disclose" any of the >information he reviews. > > > > "This lawsuit is misplaced and can only result in a total waste of > > valuable time and resources," Lynn summarized. "ICANN will defend itself > > vigorously to protect the rights of the corporation, and the legitimate > > best interests of all of ICANN's directors and of the stakeholder > community." > >This lawsuit resulted from the sixteen months that ICANN refused to accede >to Mr. Auerbach's repeated requests to review basic corporate records. If >there has been any waste, it is caused by ICANN management. > >EFF believes that the Internet community should be served by an Internet >naming authority that is open, transparent, and accountable. ICANN >management's behavior overall has been closed, opaque, and arbitrary. We >decided to assist Karl because it now appears that ICANN has failed to >abide by even the most basic standards of California law -- the placement >of ultimate control of a corporation with the Board, not the management. > >While this would be a problem in any corporation, it is especially >distressing when it concerns one of the only publicly elected members of a >nonprofit corporation that has been entrusted with control over such a >vital part of the Internet. > >Cindy > >-- End of Forwarded Message > >For archives see: >http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Farber suggests the IAB
l that ICANN has failed as >an organization, and that the amount of "bad blood" and institutional >"baggage" it carries doom "reform" efforts within the organization itself to >ineffectiveness at best. We come to this conclusion reluctantly, since in >the past we have considered that there might be an appropriate continuing >role of some sort for ICANN. Unfortunately, this is no longer possible. > >We do not have all of the answers regarding Internet issues -- nobody does. >The proposals above are not presented as any kind of fait accompli, but >rather as an attempt to stimulate recognition that the Internet is facing >serious problems that are in need of serious solutions. The search for >solutions will be difficult, and will be a continuing effort that far >transcends matters relating to ICANN. But half-measures will no longer >suffice, and the status quo (however it might be disguised or "spun") can no >longer be tolerated. > >Some persons genuinely fear that alternatives to ICANN might lead to >situations even worse than the current dysfunctional ICANN environment. >That is indeed a non-zero probability, but the increasingly chaotic >situation with ICANN makes degeneration a decided *likelihood* if ICANN >remains involved with Internet matters. > >The day of reckoning is already upon us. Work should begin immediately to >define and implement collaborative processes that can provide hope of >assuring that the Internet will be the best possible resource for the >population of the entire world. The risks in change are real, but the need >for change and the possibilities for meaningful and beneficial progress are >even greater. If we do not take these steps, we may well be dooming the >Internet to a future of mediocrity at best, or of decay, fragmentation, >greed, and even worse outrages. > >[1] PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control >http://www.pfir.org/statements/policies > >[2] PFIR Proposal for a Representative Global Internet Policy Organization >http://www.pfir.org/statements/proposal > >[3] URIICA Announcement >http://www.uriica.org/announcement > >[4] PFIR Declaration of Principles >http://www.pfir.org/principles > >Sincerely, > >David J. Farber >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Tel: +1 (610) 304-9127 >Member of the Board of Trustees EFF - http://www.eff.org >Member of the Advisory Board -- EPIC - http://www.epic.org >Member of the Advisory Board -- CDT - http://www.cdt.org >Member of Board of Directors -- PFIR - http://www.pfir.org >Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet > Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org >Member of the Executive Committee USACM >http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~farber > >Peter G. Neumann >[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Tel: +1 (650) 859-2375 >Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org >Co-Founder, Fact Squad - http://www.factsquad.org >Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet > Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org >Moderator, RISKS Forum - http://risks.org >Chairman, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy >http://www.csl.sri.com/neumann > >Lauren Weinstein >[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 >Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org >Co-Founder, Fact Squad - http://www.factsquad.org >Co-Founder, URIICA - Union for Representative International Internet > Cooperation and Analysis - http://www.uriica.org >Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com >Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy > >(Affiliations shown for identification only.) +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] ICANN Sued by Board Member/EFF
FYI: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020318/wr_nm/tech_internet_icann_dc_1 Internet Body Director Sues for Access to Records Mon Mar 18, 2:15 PM ET By Andy Sullivan WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The group that oversees the Internet's domain-name system was slapped with a lawsuit Monday by one of its directors, who says he has been denied access to the organization's corporate records. Karl Auerbach, a director of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, filed suit in Los Angeles to gain access to travel records, payroll figures, and other day-to-day details of the organization that oversees the system that guides e-mail and Web browsers around cyberspace. Auerbach said ICANN (news - web sites) staff has not allowed him to view the records, as required under California law. "ICANN management has denied me the tools I need to exercise independent judgement and fulfill my duties as director," Auerbach said in a statement. Staff members have sought to get Auerbach to sign a confidentiality agreement before viewing the records, a move he has resisted. An ICANN spokeswoman was not immediately available for comment. The move is the latest in a long-running battle between Auerbach and ICANN staff, whom he says wields too much control over the organization. One of the few ICANN directors chosen by direct elections, Auerbach has been a frequent critic of the organization and often casts the lone dissenting vote on ICANN decisions. Formed in 1998 to take control of the Internet's domain-name system from the U.S. government, ICANN has overseen the introduction of seven new domains to join the likes of ".com" and ".org," and has encouraged start-up domain-name retailers to challenge the monopoly once held by Network Solutions Inc., now a unit of VeriSign Inc . But the nonprofit body has drawn criticism from those who say it does not make decisions in a transparent fashion, and does not hold itself accountable to the 500 million people who use the global computer network. At a meeting in Accra, Ghana, last week, the ICANN board said individuals users should have a say in the organization, but did not commit to future elections. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a cyberspace civil-liberties group, is representing Auerbach in the suit. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] From the archives ...
FYI: At 3/16/99 10:49 AM, Jay Fenello wrote: >Hello Esther, > >One of the decisions of the ICANN Board was to approve >a DNSO that featured overlapping constituencies. This >creates a problem common to all constituencies, namely, >where do we draw the lines. > >For example, Iperdome may desire to join the following >constituencies, for the following reasons: > >ccTLD registries >Iperdome is the official registry for >the .per.nu domain, sub-delegated via >RFC-1591 > >Commercial and business entities >Iperdome is a business entity > >gTLD registries >Iperdome is a prospective gTLD registry > >ISPs and connectivity providers >Iperdome is an ISP > >Non-commercial domain name holders >Iperdome's clients are almost exclusively >non-commercial domain name holders. > >Registrars >Iperdome acts as a registrar for personal >domain names. > >Trademark, intellectual property, anti-counterfeiting interests >Iperdome is a trademark, and .per(sm) is a >service mark. > >My concern is that certain constituencies are >attempting to form in private, behind closed >doors. This could easily result in a biased >process, one that excludes legitimately >interested parties. > >I hereby request that the ICANN Board clearly >indicate that this is not acceptable, and that >any constituency wishing to be recognized by >ICANN must form via an open process. > >So far, I have only seen "public" postings to >form the registrar and the non-commercial domain >name holders constituencies, yet I am aware of >"private" postings for the trademark and ccTLD >registries constituencies. > >Please clarify this situation now, before >things get any worse. > >Thanks in advance. > > >Respectfully, > >Jay Fenello >President, Iperdome, Inc. >404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
Re: [IFWP] ICANN at Large: Real or Ruse?
At 3/15/02 03:25 PM, Richard J. Sexton wrote: >At 01:05 PM 3/15/02 -0700, you wrote: > >What's people's take on the new "at large" > >positions at ICANN? Are they real or > >Memorex. Agreed. It reminds me of all of the time we wasted trying to build a fair DNSO: Jay. At 2/5/99 09:51 PM, Jay Fenello wrote: >February 5, 1999 > >Memorandum for the ICANN Board and the Internet/DNS Community > >On behalf of the undersigned, ORSC, AIP, and NSI respectfully submit the >attached draft proposal for the establishment of a Domain Name Supporting >Organization of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers >(ICANN). > >This draft (the "Paris Draft") was developed during a two-day session >involving participants from a wide range of regions and perspectives on >the DNSO formation process, including representatives of registries that >account for the vast majority of current registrations in the domain name >system and that service registrants in every region of the world. That >session began by comparing all the outstanding drafts from every source >(including, of course, many parties who were not at this meeting) and >discussing in detail the many good ideas contained in various drafts and >the significance of the differences between them. Subsequent discussions >with others who were not at the meeting have led to constructive plans for >exploring further refinements and seeking further endorsements. > >We have tried our best to incorporate into a coherent document the best >views of all who favor an open, transparent, bottom up process for the >evolution of policies and industry standards applicable to the DNS. We >have sought a structure that will ensure stability, encourage flexible >change over time, allow participation by all parties impacted by the >policy development process, and assure widespread implementation of the >new policies that develop through that process. We solicit and welcome any >and all comments and suggestions. > >We have sought in this draft proposal to accomplish the goals established >by ICANN's Articles and ByLaws, as initially articulated by the US >Government's White Paper and thereafter developed in the course of >extensive discussions among diverse stakeholders. The draft contemplates >that a new DNSO structure would be established by means of an amendment to >ICANN's ByLaws, to function as a distinct but integrated part of the ICANN >process. Integration of the DNSO into ICANN both simplifies the >organizational questions (avoiding the need for a separate board and >corporate officers and staff, fund collection and additional fiscal >controls) and assures that DNSO will function to serve ICANN's goals and >will comply with ICANN's Articles and ByLaws. This approach also allows >more extensive and specific discussion of the particular processes by >which appropriate expertise and the perspectives of impacted parties may >be brought to bear on these complex and dynamic issues. > >The draft provides for an open DNSO membership that may self-organize into >various constituencies, which may be adjusted from time to time. The >constituencies would select a regionally diverse Names Council, the role >of which will be to facilitate and recognize the emergence of consensus >among the membership as a whole (acting through both a General Assembly >and various Research Committees established to study and report on >specific issues). The draft intentionally rejects a "representational" >model that would empower a small group of Name Council members to adopt or >reject recommendations to be forwarded to ICANN. Instead, it seeks to >assure true, bottom up and widespread consensus > >(1) by calling for expert and diverse participation in production of reports, >(2) by submitting reports to the General Assembly for comment and >ratification, >(3) by allowing any adversely impacted constituencies to request fair >hearings, and >(4) by requiring that a full report of the policy research and development >process (not just the report of a majority vote of a top down governing >body) be forward to the ICANN Board for its review once the Names Council >judges that general consensus has been achieved. > >The draft further seeks to assure the enforceability of policies >ultimately adopted by ICANN and to encourage those who must implement any >policies to enter into contractual relationships with ICANN that will make >that result achievable. In particular, it lays the groundwork for >contracts between ICANN and registries that could require the registries, >who must implement most policies and flow them down to registrars and >registra
[IFWP] Re: Four more years?
At 2/28/02 02:47 AM, Richard J. Sexton wrote: >The problem, Jay as I see it, is this: can ICANN be reformed? I don't >think so - not with the people that are in charge of it now. Why are >they there then? Ira/the DoC appointed them. Why the DoC? >Because in the Inter-agency Domain Name Task force meetings 4 >years ago the DoC claimed to have all the answers so when >everybody else stopped snickering, they told them "sure, go run with >it". Why did the DoC want to run is? Large 3 letter corporations >lobbied to the tune of tens if not hundreds of millions to make sure >DoC got the ball. Follow the money. > >Remember, this is still all under DoC oversight. ICANN has admitted >they're "in constant communications" with them just like they're in >"constant communications" with foreign governments - which is rightly >the job of the State Department. Hi Richard, Can ICANN be reformed? I don't see how, when it is a result of a political process that is every bit as corrupt as ICANN is. That's why I wrote: >ICANN taking over the Internet is not the problem. >It is merely a reflection of our current "system" >as it has evolved over time. >This has manifested itself into, once again, the installation of power of >a group, not of the community, over that community - In this sense >ICANN is just a recapitulation of the IAHC disaster; sero sum games >both. The IFWP consensus documents came very very close to this >whole group acting as a coherent one but big monied interests acting through >outside forces not really committed to the community it pretended to >be a part of couldn't let that happen and the thing was derailed faster >then Enron became a national laughing stock. > >Kill the head and the body will die. Nothing will get done till the DoC >is taken out of the position of having absolute power. Or thinking it >does. But the DoC is the result of a political process every bit as corrupt as the DoC is. What we have is a systemic problem, one that can be described by field theory. To fix it, we'll need a comprehensive approach. >They had their chance, we've suffered 4 years of them screwing up >and I think that's enough. Agreed :-) Jay. >-- > With foxes we must play the fox. - unknown > /"\ / http://www.vrx.net > \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / http://killifish.vrx.net > X AGAINST HTML MAIL/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (613) 473-1719 > / \ AND POSTINGS/ http://www.mbz.org http://www.dnso.com +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Re: ICANN President proposes end to At-Large public elections
There goes Internet democracy ... At 2/25/02 12:08 PM, Chris Chiu wrote: >During a private "retreat," the President of the Internet Corporation for >Assigned Names and Numbers, M. Stuart Lynn, proposed vast changes to ICANN's >governing structure. These plans call for the abolition of ICANN public >elections and for national governments to select a third of ICANN's >reconstituted Board. > >See >http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/#highlights > >Sincerely, >Christopher Chiu >Global Internet Liberty Campaign Organizer >American Civil Liberties Union +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Re: Setting one record straight....
At 2/26/02 06:25 PM, Jim Fleming wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Einar Stefferud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > What is this? > >Stef, > >I believe we agree that the ICANN Monster is out of control. > >In my opinion, it is important to document where the ICANN Monster >came from. People do not seem to understand how such a beast forms >and who is responsible. People also do not seem to understand why >some people close to the situation would stop what they are doing and >step aside to allow the monster to grow and become unchained. Hi Jim, I can remember when many of the people on your cc: list first joined the ICANN debate. I can also remember how, one by one, they slowly came to realize how corrupt the process really was -- just like I did. Before that moment, our actions were driven by mistaken assumptions about the way our world works. But how were we to know? Everything we've been taught, and read, and seen on TV, supported the illusion that kept us stuck. [At least, this was true for me :-] Anyway, I agree with your comments about "the Monster." If we really want to stop it, we must first understand how it grows. More below ... >The >same thing happened with the IAHC. That required people at the highest >levels of the U.S. Government to stop it in it's tracks. You may want to >enlighten everyone on how all that happened. Most peasants, like me, >only saw shadows of the monster and heard the crash when it fell and >saw the people running from the scene.We are told later that powerful >dragon slayers like yourself fought the battle and won. > >The Aspen Institute appears to be the Jurassic Park of the Internet. Each >time these monsters appear the Aspen Institute pops up as one of the >potential breeding grounds. What is odd is that very few people seem >to want to admit to being involved. We are now seeing leaders of ICANN >who claim not to be accountable for anything that went on while they >were running the show. We also see indirect messages from U.S. Government >officials that they are not informed or involved. I find it interesting that >even the members of Jon Postel's ITAG, who architected ICANN, are >now making it appear that they were not involved. Despite all of this, >when a critical meeting is called, all of the "right people" seem to show up >and eventually news leaks out that reform is underway, and the monster >grows. > >I suppose everyone has to watch and wait to hear about the fate of the >current ICANN monster. I hate to over-simplify, but all that is left is for >the insiders to make sure that .ORG becomes their cash cow. Maybe the >millions from that will feed the monster and it will become passive and fade >from the scene, grazing on the green stuff flowing from the masses...who >clearly are kept a long way from the inner circles and inner workings of >the Internet ICANN taking over the Internet is not the problem. It is merely a reflection of our current "system" as it has evolved over time. In actuality, our system is a collection of memes. It's a consciousness that is guiding our collective actions and behaviors. And it's leading us towards disaster ... Instead of fighting the ICANN hydra, let's recognize the beast for what it really is. Once we do, our path will become clear. Comments welcome. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] The ITU, to the rescue ...
The ITU, to the rescue ... http://www.geneva2003.org/home/index01.htm Background The international community is organizing a World Summit on the Information Society. It will take place in two phases: in Geneva, December 2003, to be followed up in Tunis two years later. The Information Society is at the heart of the political, social, cultural and economic questions confronting us in the beginning of the 21st century. The focus of the Information Society Summit is not technology but the human being - we must keep in mind that it is not enough to be connected to resolve the fundamental problems that exist in the world. What values do we embrace to ensure that the Information Society becomes a vehicle for democracy, justice, equality, the respect for individuals and peoples, their personal and social development? What is the role of communication in shaping the future of the society we want to build? Information travels at an increasingly faster rate. How does it affect people of different cultures and stages of development? How do we respect each other's differences while building a responsible society? How do we give each culture the space and visibility necessary to participate in a dynamic that is revolutionizing society? How do we give each individual the tools of information and communication necessary to his prosperity and creative potential? These are among the questions facing the international community. Everyone has a stake in the Summit. The opportunity is there to raise the issues you would like to see addressed at the Summit. You will find here the information you need to take part in the process. The idea of a World Summit on the Information Society took root at the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference in Minneapolis in 1998 and is based on three resolutions: Resolution 73 adopted at the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference in Minneapolis in 1998 Resolution 1158 of the ITU Council adopted in 2000 Resolution 1179 of the ITU Council adopted in 2001 Objectives The Summit plans to adopt: 1.a Declaration embodying a set of principles and rules of conduct aimed at establishing a more inclusive and equitable Information Society; and 2.a Plan of Action formulating operational proposals and concrete measures to be taken so that people the world over will benefit more equitably from the opportunities presented by the Information Society. When and where Geneva, 10 - 12 December 2003 A second phase is expected to take place in Tunis in 2005 to follow up on the decisions taken in Geneva. Who will participate? The Summit will bring together Heads of States, representatives of government, parliament, international organizations, local authorities, the private sector and civil society. A "Government PLUS" Summit Without the active participation of civil society, local authorities, and the private sector, an equitable Information Society cannot exist. This means that a new form of dialogue must take place between governments and the partners concerned: community & citizens' networks professional associations development and solidarity associations multi-stakeholder coalitions academics trade unions media To meet this challenge a new process has been established to explore creative ways of interaction that will allow everyone to provide input towards the decision-making process. In this way, the Summit will act as a testing ground for future negotiations at a global level as well as pave new ways of governance in the Information Society. But much depends on the strong mobilization of all stakeholders to come together and take part in the preparatory process leading up to the Summit. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Bill Moyers Interviews Benjamin Barber
or democracy with equal force and equal strength to take on global markets, to take on global corporations, to take on the and anarchic side of globalization that is economic and not just fundamentalism. MOYERS: You're calling for something akin to the Reformation several hundred years ago. For years now the ruling ideology, the ruling religion of America has been free market. Its god and profit. Its heaven is the corporate board room. Its hell is regulation. Its Bible is THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. Its choir of angels is the corporate media. You've got a religion in this country of free markets that is established in the political culture as well. How do you expect to have a Reformation? BARBER: Because we have the great and perverse assistance now of a new anti-prophet named Osama bin Laden. We have September 11. We have seen suddenly and abruptly the perverse animal and malevolent side of globalization, of anarchy of a world without rules of a world in which the United States refuses to play ball with the new international criminal tribunal which is now not available to deal with terrorists. The corporations have seen it too and they are scared. President Bush who came in after all as a kind of fraternity boy interested primarily in seeing to it that the economic interest that had supported him and he had supported would have free reign has suddenly become an apostle of strong government. Yes in the name of a war on terrorism but many different dimensions of that war point back to a relegitimation of our democratic institutions. The President in the State of the Union said this is going on, folks. This is a long war. This was isn't over. He even hinted toward the end of the speech that it was a war that would require volunteer citizens doing community service, that would require other things than just military actions. MOYERS: To beat my favorite dead horse poor thing can we do what you're talking about unless we break the grip of money on our political system? BARBER:No, I would say if there's one thing we first have to do it's to do genuine and real campaign finance reform because if the money interests in America, the powerful corporate interests in America through money control the government that in turn controls the international organization like the World Trade Organization, like the International Monetary Fund, like the NAFTA treaties and the regulations there, then there's a vicious circle because in effect they don't have to buy the international regulations, they buy the governments here and let our government buy the international regulations on their behalf. It's that vicious cycle that I think we now have a potential to break because of the events of September 11 and their aftermath. MOYERS: What is your answer or your response to Italy's Berlusconi or America's Henry Kissinger who say that to pursue democratic values as Benjamin Barber is proposing, to pursue democratic values in this kind of world is to undermine our true national interest. BARBER: Well, people like Sam Huntington and his clash of civilizations have argued and Berlusconi Prime Minister, the Conservative, the almost Neo Fascist Prime Minister of Italy has argued that the West alone is democratic. Islam and the rest of the world is not democratic. This is a clash between democracy and Islam. The West and the rest. But that goes back to a long ancient quarrel in the democratic tradition. There's two kinds of democrats. Democracy for me and mine. The Athenians, a few of them were citizens and everybody else were slaves. The American founders us white men with property, we're good democratic citizens but women, blacks, slaves, non-property owning whites, not good citizens. And those who have believed in what I believe is the true democratic tradition that democracy is the right of every man woman and child to be engaged in acts of self-governance, that every living human wants to govern his and her own life and wants to participate in the communities of power that govern them. In other words, democracy is a claim not that I run my life and I have a right to but that we all have exactly the same right. It's a universal claim. That's the claim I'm betting on. It's not just idealism. That's the new realism. The new realism says whether or not you agree with Barber on this, we will not have our democracy unless they find a democracy in Palestinian and Afghanistan. There are no walls high enough to keep out the perils of a world full of injustice and inequality. There are no oceans wide enough, no walls high enough to separate us from that world. That means that the new inter-dependence which is the essence of globalization means we can't have democracy by ourselves. We all get it around the world or in time
[IFWP] PBS: "TRADING DEMOCRACY" Tues, FEB 5 at 10pm
s in favor of the Canadian company," says Moyers. > >But the ramifications for the public go well beyond the loss of taxpayer >dollars, a journalist William Greider explains. "If Methanex wins its >billion dollar claim over California environmental law, there ain't gonna >be many states enacting that law, are there?" he says, adding that the >NAFTA provision "hobbles the authority of government to act in the broader >public interest. And, in fact, that was the idea in the first place." > >Addressing a Chapter 11 case in which the Ethyl Corporation, an American >manufacturer of another gasoline additive called MMT, successfully sued >Canada over a ban on the product, Greider tells Moyers: "Governments are >already being intimidated by the mere threat of a claim being filed >against some regulatory action. If you're a civil servant, or even a >political leader, you've got to think twice when a corporate lawyer comes >to you and says, quite forcefully, we're going to hit you for a half a >billion dollars if you do this." > >Moyers also takes his investigation south of the border to the Mexican >state of San Luis Potosí, where an American company called Metalclad tried >to bulldoze over the protests of both state and local governments to >reopen a toxic waste dump that many citizens feared was making them sick. >When Metalclad was stopped by the local town council the company invoked >Chapter 11 and was awarded $16 million in compensation. The crux of >Metalclad's victory was the Chapter 11 phrase "tantamount to >expropriation." As Martin Wagner explains: "Not only do governments have >to compensate when they expropriate or take away property, but they have >to do so whenever they do something that is 'tantamount to expropriation'." > >Challenges being mounted under Chapter 11 are not only directed toward >regulatory activity, they are also successfully overruling jury decisions >in civil courts of law. The documentary explores a case in Mississippi >where a Biloxi funeral home owner was awarded punitive damages by a jury >in a civil suit against a large Canadian corporation called the Loewen >Group. The local funeral home owner alleged that the Loewen Group had >engaged in "fraudulent" and "predatory" trade practices, and the jury >found against the Canadian company. Three years later, the Loewen Group >filed a Chapter 11 claim against American taxpayers saying the jury was >biased against Canadians, and in a preliminary ruling, the NAFTA tribunal >has declared the Mississippi trial a legitimate target. The Loewen suit, >notes Moyers, "could conceivably open the U.S. civil justice system to >challenge --including decisions of the United States Supreme Court." > >This startling realization, and the knowledge that corporate giants are >pushing to expand NAFTA to 31 more countries in the Western Hemisphere, >prompts Moyers to ask, "Are we promoting democracy - as we claim - or >trading it away?" > >TRADING DEMOCRACY is the latest collaboration between Bill Moyers and >producer Sherry Jones, who produced TRADE SECRETS: A MOYERS REPORT in >March 2001. Their previous productions include WASHINGTON'S OTHER SCANDAL, >the Peabody-winning investigation of campaign finance scandals in the 1996 >Presidential elections, and the Emmy-winning HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS >for PBS's Frontline series. > >--- >Want more information about Chapter 11? Visit these links: Public Citizen >released a comprehensive report on Chapter 11 called: "NAFTA Chapter 11 >Investor-to-State Cases: Bankrupting Democracy": >http://www.citizen.org/publications/release.cfm?ID=7076 > >There is also a shorter article from Multinational Monitor "NAFTA's >Investor "Rights" A Corporate Dream, A Citizen Nightmare" that is well >worth reading: >http://www.essential.org/monitor/mm2001/01april/corp1.html > >Several organizations have also released information on Chapter 11, >including Center for International Environmental Law (www.ciel.org), >Friends of the Earth (www.foe.org) and the Sierra Club >(www.sierraclub.org). > >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The first step is to penetrate the clouds of deceit and distortion and learn the truth about the world, then to organize and act to change it. That's never been impossible and never been easy." -- Noam Chomsky
[IFWP] Islamic Banking and the War on Terror
FYI: A new AWP Talk Radio Interview is now online: http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com/radio.htm In this edition, Tom Kennedy, the visionary behind Cyberclass.net and a supporter of Usury Free Economics, talks about our current economic system and its relationship to the war against terrorism. He also talks about Islamic banking, and how it is at odds with the WTO, IMF and the World Bank. Part 1 of a two part interview. ### This message is from the Aligning With Purpose Announcements list. Please send subscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED], unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED], or check out the website at http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com P.S. Other points of view welcome. Please reply to this email to schedule an interview. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "The Constitution is supposed to control the government, not vice versa." -- Joseph Sobran
Re: [IFWP] IFWP_LIST V1 #950
At 11/10/01 04:23 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >A short trip to ICANN's website clears it up. > >http://www.icann.org/mdr2001/ > >Under "Sponsorship Opportunities", they emphasize the words >"commercial materials" in their request for a $5k fee. Political >materials would certainly be permissible. > >Fact is better than rumor when propagandizing, kids. > >Ob. swipe: If you enter "icann.org" in your browser, you get an >error. You have to enter "www.icann.org". Geniuses. Bloody, ironic, >geniuses. > >--Blair Hi Blair, In typical ICANN fashion, the website was changed *after* the outcry ... At 11/9/01 05:29 PM, David Farber wrote: >From: "Judith Oppenheimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: IP-FLASH ICANN replies to ACLU protest of $5,000 leafleting >charge >Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:22:39 -0500 > > > > [ That was not the impression given before. > >Apparently ICANN agrees, as it has just changed the website to say that the >ban only applies to "commercial materials," along with a proviso that the >ICANN meetings are "not a trade show." > >It seems to me that ICANN fostered the trade show mentality, especially >during the meeting a year ago when the new gTLD prospects were feverishly >pitching their wares. But then, they did pay $50,000 each for the >privilege of doing so. > >Judith +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World - "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." -- John F. Kennedy
[IFWP] Re: Fw: [Enum] Robert and Douglas' Protocols and Services draft...
I see that nothing has changed on the ICANN/IANA front. In many ways, it is a reflection of what's wrong in the world today. In a recent radio interview, I talk with John Bunzl about his views on this "destructive competition." If anyone's interested, you can hear it at: http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com/radio.htm Jay. At 11/1/01 12:11 AM, Jim Fleming wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Richard Shockey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Judith Oppenheimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 3:18 PM >Subject: RE: [Enum] Robert and Douglas' Protocols and Services draft... > > > > At 03:45 PM 10/31/2001 -0500, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > > >Got it ... just a quick reminder, IANA no longer exists. > > > > Judith ..please ... this is getting quite tiresome ... the IANA functions > > are contracted to ICANN and as such it exists as a functional entity. > > > > >Particularly for those of you who have insisted that ICANN will have > > >nothing to do wth ENUM, what was IANA, is now solely, wholly, ICANN. > > > > > >ICANN staff, ICANN payroll, ICANN politics, ICANN decisions, ICANN >policy. > > >ICANN implications and ICANN ramifications. > > > > This is a warning .. the co-chairs patience for this kind of "Jim Fleming" > > ranting is wearing very thin and as I have stated in the past, we will use > > our administrative control of the mail list manager if we are pressed. > > > > > > > > >-- > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives > > NeuStar Inc. > > 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 > > 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 > > Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 > > or > > > > <http://www.neustar.com> > > <http://www.enum.org> > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > > > > > ___ > > enum mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: 219/8 allocated to APNIC
At 10/18/01 12:56 PM, John L Crain wrote: >Firstly let me apologies to those on the Cc: list. Unless I hear directly >that you are interested in this discussion I will not include you in any >future correspondence. Also my apologies if by my replying this got past >your .procmail. Long Cc lists are a pain > >Jim, > >Simple answer: $0 changed hands between IANA and the APNIC in the >allocation of 219/8 > >The price you quote ($12.000.000)is totally new to me and frankly seems >ludicrous. There is no evidence that I can find to collaborate your claim. It's apparently a secret that no-one ever wants to talk about. Please keep me on your cc: list. Thanks, Jay. >Could it be that you are talking about one of the other "versions" of IP, >IPv8, IPv16 or IPv256 (Whichever is your latest)? > >John Crain >ICANN/IANA > > > > What did APNIC pay for this allocation ? > > It used to be that /8s were worth about $12,000,000. > > > > Jim Fleming +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Joe Stiglitz - The globalizer who came in from the cold
es by the acronym TRIPS, more on that in the next > chapters). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has > "condemned people to death" by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to > pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. "They don't care," > said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, "if > people live or die." > > By the way, don't be confused by the mix in this discussion of the IMF, > World Bank and WTO. They are interchangeable masks of a single governance > system. They have locked themselves together by what are unpleasantly > called, "triggers." Taking a World Bank loan for a school 'triggers' a > requirement to accept every 'conditionality' - they average 111 per nation - > laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF > requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official > WTO rules. > > Stiglitz greatest concern is that World Bank plans, devised in secrecy and > driven by an absolutist ideology, are never open for discourse or dissent. > Despite the West's push for elections throughout the developing world, the > so-called Poverty Reduction Programs "undermine democracy." > > And they don't work. Black Africa's productivity under the guiding hand of > IMF structural "assistance" has gone to hell in a handbag. Did any nation > avoid this fate? Yes, said Stiglitz, identifying Botswana. Their trick? > "They told the IMF to go packing." > > So then I turned on Stiglitz. OK, Mr Smart-Guy Professor, how would you help > developing nations? Stiglitz proposed radical land reform, an attack at the > heart of "landlordism," on the usurious rents charged by the propertied > oligarchies worldwide, typically 50% of a tenant's crops. So I had to ask > the professor: as you were top economist at the World Bank, why didn't the > Bank follow your advice? > > "If you challenge [land ownership], that would be a change in the power of > the elites. That's not high on their agenda." Apparently not. > > Ultimately, what drove him to put his job on the line was the failure of the > banks and US Treasury to change course when confronted with the crises - > failures and suffering perpetrated by their four-step monetarist mambo. > Every time their free market solutions failed, the IMF simply demanded more > free market policies. > > "It's a little like the Middle Ages," the insider told me, "When the patient > died they would say, 'well, he stopped the bloodletting too soon, he still > had a little blood in him.'" > > I took away from my talks with the professor that the solution to world > poverty and crisis is simple: remove the bloodsuckers. > > > *A version of this was first published as "The IMF's Four Steps to > Damnation" in The Observer (London) in April and another version in The Big > Issue - that's the magazine that the homeless flog on platforms in the > London Underground. Big Issue offered equal space to the IMF, whose "deputy > chief media officer" wrote: > > "... I find it impossible to respond given the depth and breadth of hearsay > and misinformation in [Palast's] report." > > Of course it was difficult for the Deputy Chief to respond. The information > (and documents) came from the unhappy lot inside his agency and the World > Bank. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: IP: Rethinking the design of the Internet: The end to end arguments vs. the brave new world
and issues of efficiency and performance may motivate >>core-located features. Features that enhance popular applications can be >>added to the core of the network in such a way that they do not prevent >>other applications from functioning. But the bias toward movement of >>function "up" from the core and "out" to the edge node has served very >>well as a central Internet design principle. >> >>As a consequence of the end to end arguments, the Internet has evolved >>to have certain characteristics. The functions implemented "in" the >>Internet-by the routers that forward packets-have remained rather simple >>and general. The bulk of the functions that implement specific >>applications, such as e-mail, the World Wide Web, multi-player games, >>and so on, have been implemented in software on the computers attached >>to the "edge" of the Net. The edge-orientation for applications and >>comparative simplicity within the Internet together have facilitated the >>creation of new applications, and they are part of the context for >>innovation on the Internet. >> >>Moving away from end to end >> >>For its first 20 years, much of the Internet's design has been shaped by >>the end to end arguments. To a large extent, the core of the network >>provides a very general data transfer service, which is used by all the >>different applications running over it. The individual applications have >>been designed in different ways, but mostly in ways that are sensitive >>to the advantages of the end to end design approach. However, over the >>last few years, a number of new requirements have emerged for the >>Internet and its applications. To certain stakeholders, these various >>new requirements might best be met through the addition of new mechanism >>in the core of the network. This perspective has, in turn, raised >>concerns among those who wish to preserve the benefits of the original >>Internet design. >> >>Continued at: >> >>http://www.ana.lcs.mit.edu/anaweb/PDF/Rethinking_2001.pdf > >For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/ +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
Re: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
At 9/18/01 12:54 AM, Blair P. Houghton wrote: > > -- > > > > Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:49:12 -0400 > > From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision > >Since when has this been the Marxist wing-nut list? Why would you think that? Jay. >--Blair >"ICANN SUX!" >-ob. ifwp +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] The Future of Democracy
tml > >[2] Draft Report, "Recommended Membership Alternative," approx. p. 12. > >[3] Draft Report, "At-Large Membership Representation," approx. p. 17. > >[4] Draft Report, "'Individual Domain Name Holder' Defined," approx. p. 14. > >[5] Draft Report, "Letter to the ICANN Board and Community," approx. p. 1. > >[6] Draft Report, "Executive Summary," approx. p. 5. > >[7] NGO and Academic ICANN Study, "ICANN, Legitimacy, and the Public >Voice: Making Global Participation and Representation Work," August 2001, >"Executive Summary," p. >9. http://www.naisproject.org/report/final/execsummaryUSLetter.pdf > >[8] Mueller, Milton. 1999. "ICANN and Internet Governance: Sorting Through >the Debris of 'Self-regulation'" Info, Vol. 1, No. 6, >December. http://www.icannwatch.org/archive/muell.pdf > >[9] Lessig, Lawrence, "A Bad Turn for Net Governance," The Industry >Standard, 18 September 1998, >http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,1718,00.html > >[10] Klein, Hans, "On-Line Social Movements and Internet Governance," >_Peace_Review_, September 2001. Draft available online at: >http://www.atlargestudy.org/kleinpaper.html > >[11] Klein, Hans, "Cyber-Federalist No. 10: The Origins of ICANN's At >Large Membership" 27 March 2001, >http://www.cpsr.org/internetdemocracy/cyber-fed/Number_10.html . > >[12] Boston Working Group: http://www.cavebear.com/bwg/ > >[13] Wilkinson, Christopher, comments at ICANN Public Forum, Yokohama, >Japan, 15 July 2000. The full quote is: "I think it is a great mistake >to initiate the debate [about whether or how users should be represented >on the board through Membership At Large Board seats] on the basis of >by-law changes; the Board is increasingly giving the impression of being >extremely cavalier in changes to the >by-laws." http://www.tbtf.com/roving_reporter/icann1.html#11 > >### > >= > >CYBER-FEDERALIST is a regularly published series of analyses and >commentaries on Internet governance and ICANN. See: > http://www.cyber-federalist.org (archive) > >It is produced as part of the Internet Democracy Project. See: > http://www.civsoc.org > http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/ > >The Cyber-Federalist is written by Hans Klein: > http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~hk28/ > >Subscribe to the CYBER-FEDERALIST! Send an Email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >= +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] Yahoogroups and Carnivore
Well, something's definitely changed. I've now gotten independent verification that yahoogroups postings are being delayed almost 4 hours. They used to be sent within minutes. It apparently started yesterday, and is still continuing now (I posted an email to FixGov over an hour ago, and still nothing). FWIW, Jay. At 9/17/01 10:34 AM, James McGuigan wrote: >- Original Message ----- >From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 5:58 AM >Subject: [awpd] Yahoogroups and Carnivore > > >Yahoogroups is apparently offline, and it's been >rumored that it's due to the FBI's installation >of Carnivore in ISPs throughout the country. > >Can anyone verify this? > >Jay. > > >I havn't heard anything, and have been fully able to view and reply to >messages via yahoogroups, both on awdp plus a few others I'm also subscribed >to. www.yahoogroups.com is acessable via a browser. I have a feeling that >the troubles might have been something to do with your individual account, >which got messed up (though I would think innocent computer error over a >conspericy against you). I've been getting quite a few messgaes from you >today, here's a list of the ones showing on my computer (including times >recieved): > >17/09/01 >Islamic Banking - 11:52 >Re: Bush caused US Devistation - 11:45 >Lone Voice Urging Restraint - 11:28 >Rep. Lee Dissents in Use of Force - 11:23 >Interview Part II - 11:09 >Interview w/bin Laden - 11:02 >Yahoogroups and Carnivore - 10:48 >Resend: Another Slant on who is responsible - 9:50 > >Then there's no messages from you since the 14th. I'm sending this message >to both the lists you asked([EMAIL PROTECTED] + [EMAIL PROTECTED]) and to you >via direct e-mail. So if everything is back to normal you should get a total >of three copies of this message. > >Hope this helps. > >Rules are written for those who lack the ability to truly reason, >But for those who can, rules become nothing more than guidelines, >And live their lives governed not by rules but by reason. > - James McGuigan > > +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Yahoogroups and Carnivore
Yahoogroups is apparently offline, and it's been rumored that it's due to the FBI's installation of Carnivore in ISPs throughout the country. Can anyone verify this? Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: Spreading the Vision
FYI: At 9/13/01 11:12 PM, Barry Carter wrote: >Below is an email that I am sending out to various people that are not aware >of Infinite Wealth: > >Sept 11, was predictable and was predicted in the online book Infinite >Wealth http://www.winwinworld.net/book (chapters 8 and 9). As we transition >from the Industrial Age to the Information Age terrorism, war, violence and >death will increase exponentially. The acts of violence of Sept 11, 2001 as >well as the acts of the past 20, years are just the beginning of what will >likely be millions and hundreds of millions of deaths, unless we understand >what is occurring and take action locally. As we transition from the >Industrial Age to the Information Age we are in the greatest transition in >all of human history and must understand what is occurring how we are all >participating in creating the events of Sept 11. The book Infinite Wealth, >which is free online, explains how to get to the root causes of this issue. >Infinite Wealth is a vision book. "Where there is no vision the people will >perish". "Where there is vision the people will flourish." >http://www.winwinworld.net/book > >The Industrial Age has been a win/lose era. In our current wealth creation >system one must lose in order for another to win. As we transition into the >Information Age knowledge is becoming the premier power in the world. Power >is, therefore, being decentralized into the hands of individuals including >people on the losing side of win/lose. Thus, individuals in the knowledge >era have enormous power to create or destroy. If we continue win/lose wealth >creation some of the people on the losing side of win/lose are not going to >take it any more. Many people world wide have suffered enormously at the >hands of this win/lose wealth creation system over the past centuries >including a holocaust of 9.6 million Native American dead, tens of millions >of African American enslaved, thousands lynched including my uncle Tom >Coles, 30,000 children dead each day from poverty and starvation worldwide, >millions of poverty stricken Black youths in the inter-cities of the US >absorbed with gangs and drugs and oppression world wide. > >Yes, many people are angry and rightfully so. Individuals on the losing side >of win/lose now have the power to kill tens of thousands and millions of >people with a single act. We are today transitioning from the Industrial >Age to the Information Age and all social transitions, like this, through >out history have caused enormous death, destruction and chaos. In order to >prevent millions and hundreds of millions of deaths we must transition to >win/win wealth creation for the Information Age. If we resist or ignore >win/win wealth creation we will pay with the lives of ourselves our friends >and/or our family. Take a look at the book Infinite Wealth free on-line >http://www.winwinworld.net/book > >Our politicians, leaders, news media, the military and corporations cannot >solve our problems. Only you acting at the local level can solve this. >Please read Infinite Wealth free online. See chapters 8 & 9 in regards to >what happened on Sept 11. > >Barry Carter FWIW, I've read Barry's book, and it resonated with me. I'd highly recommend it. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: Introduction
At 9/12/01 08:37 PM, Joanna Lane wrote: >Hello Jay, > >I am very interested in your response, in particular this:- > > > And when you say ... > > "I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate > > allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in > > abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN > > organization on a daily basis. If what I hear is true, this story is bigger > > than Watergate..." > > ... you imply that the media hasn't covered ICANN > > because they are ignorant about what has been > > going on. > > > > Truth of the matter is, they aren't ignorant, > > they are simply suppressing the story. I know > > this first hand, as I have spent hours educating > > reporters, only to have them transferred, fired, > > or their stories rejected or changed by their > > editors. > >I would be most interested in knowing the facts you have to substantiate >these allegations. However, I have to tell you that I am in new York, and as >such, deeply affected by recent events, with one missing family member. >Understandably, I am taking some time out of ICANN affairs to give priority >elsewhere, but wanted to flag this as something deserving of attention in >due course. Please send your response on or offlist and I will get back to >you when I can. Hi Joanna, First, my thoughts are with you and your family. I hope everyone's ok. As to your request, I've had several exchanges with reporters and editors about their blackout, several of which are documented in the email archives. To get you started, please check out: >http://www.fenello.com/writings/wto1.htm There, I describe the technique of framing, and how it's been used. Then, I'd refer you to the congressional testimony of Mikki Barry (I believe she's on this list.) Even though it was an excellent summary of the excesses of ICANN, and a part of the congressional record, it was totally ignored by the media. If after all that, you still want more, I will dig through my archives and post some of exchanges from the past. Jay. >Regards, >Joanna +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: Introduction
At 9/10/01 09:52 PM, Joanna Lane wrote: >Hello Einar, >The funny thing about this medium is that while I have no idea who you are, >you feel entitled to ask me all kinds of questions without introducing >yourself. If this were the phone, I doubt I'd take your call...;-) Hi Joanna, You can read more about Stef and some of the rest of us at: http://www.open-rsc.org/about/who/ > > At 17:45 -0400 09/09/01, Joanna Lane wrote: > >> Just a note to introduce myself to this list. For those that don't me, > >> please visit http://www.internetstakeholders.com, with particular > reference > >> to the ICANN Board Candidate Statement I made yesterday at Montevideo. A very good intro, especially from someone who has been involved with ICANN for only a little over a year. However, I would like to point out a couple of fallacies in your position, at least from my experience. First, that your bid for an ICANN board position would have any impact on the current policies of ICANN. Given the impact of the current At-Large Board members, your impact is likely to be zero. This is not only because the current board can outvote the ALBMs, but because ICANN is now run by an executive committee of the board, and most of the decisions are made by the staff anyway. And when you say ... "I call upon the mainstream media to investigate and substantiate allegations of deceptive practices and corruption that flow forth in abundance from those monitoring proceedings from within the ICANN organization on a daily basis. If what I hear is true, this story is bigger than Watergate..." ... you imply that the media hasn't covered ICANN because they are ignorant about what has been going on. Truth of the matter is, they aren't ignorant, they are simply suppressing the story. I know this first hand, as I have spent hours educating reporters, only to have them transferred, fired, or their stories rejected or changed by their editors. As unbelievable as these allegations are, they are true ... not only for ICANN, but for many other institutions like the WTO. Just like we have been marginalized and ignored by the powers behind ICANN, others have been marginalized and ignored by the powers behind the WTO. As an example, I have just completed an interview with Dr. Bill Ellis, a long time activist (he's 80 years old) who once worked for the UN and the World Bank. You can hear it online at: http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com/images/BillEllis.ra He describes how they have been meeting in parallel with the G7 meetings for 20 years, and how the media's refusal to cover their positions directly lead to the riots in Seattle, Quebec and Genoa. He also echo's many of Stef's points about chaos theory, edge control and systemic change. Hope this helps, and please let me know if you have any questions. Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
Re: [IFWP] Reviving this list
At 9/9/01 10:21 AM, you wrote: > > FWIW, I got a verbal summary online at: > > http://www.iperdome.com/images/iperdome1.ra > >This was most interesting to listen to. Hopefully you do not hold it >against me, if I do not put it up at www.ifwp.org. Despite all the >historical details, it is very much about iperdome, not ifwp. If I got >this wrong, convince me :-) No, I wasn't suggesting that ... I was suggesting that newcomers need an easy way to learn about the detailed history of the IFWP. Some of it was covered above, but many of the details were missing because of its Iperdome focus. >Thanks for staying into the whole 'shit'. Well, I've really moved on from wasting any more time on ICANN. I remain involved only to document the historical record, so people can see how it relates to the big picture. (For an incomplete summary of the big picture, please see: http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com ) Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
Re: [IFWP] The emperor is still naked
Hi Everyone, For an excellent summary of where we are heading, check out the online book: http://www.winwinworld.net/book/ I've embraced many of the concept there, as can be seen on: http://www.fenello.com http://www.aligningwithpurpose.com FYI & FWIW, Jay. At 9/8/01 02:27 PM, Ken Freed wrote: >Wrongaroonie, Einar -- >The goal is a decentralized network of independent democracies, >just as we need individuals practicing reponsible self rule from a >common global sense of our deep interactivity. That how genuine >freedom and democracy can work best. Isn't it time for us humans >to outgrow our addiction to despots? Or do we still fear adulthood? >-- ken > >Ken Freed, Publisher >Media Visions Journal >http://www.media-visions.com > >"Deep literacy makes global sense." > > > > >And then we can undertake to create a global constitution for the > >Global Economy, and then take on any other edge controlled > >environments which also surely\ need to have a constitution, to apply > >Centralized Democratic Government. > > > >Enjoy your trip;-)... > > > >At 12:47 -0600 07/09/01, Ken Freed wrote: > >>Seems to me any effort to work within ICANN > >>to acheive "network democracy" is innately an > >>act of self-deception, continuing the public lie > >>that ICANN is a legitimate government. It isn't. > >> > >>There has never been a public vote to privatise > >>our public Internet. There has never been a public > >>vote to grant any governance power to ICANN. The > >>emperor is clothed in a fabric of veiled delusions. > >> > >>I still advocate a global Internet constitution, so we > >>have a governmewnt of laws not committees. > >> > >>Ken Freed > >>Media Visions Journal > >>http://www.media-visions.com > >> > >>"Deep literacy makes global sense" > >> > >> > >> >(fixed) > >> > > >> >>Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 08:21:30 -0500 > >> >>From: "ooblick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >>Subject: Re: Re: Why wake up? (Re: [IFWP] Is this list up? (Test, > ignore, > >> >>sorry)) > >> >>To: "Dan Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >>MIME-Version: 1.0 > >> >>Content-Type: text/plain > >> >>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2001 12:18:55.0359 (UTC) > >> >>FILETIME=[EE94E8F0:01C13604] > >> >> > >> >>Hear hear. So i am going on vacation. The fix was in from the get go > >> >>and all we were was pawns to lend legitimacy to their fabricated claims > >> >>of consensus. > >> >> > >> >>See you next week. I'm going diving. > >> >>> Original Message --- > >> >>>From: Dan Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >>>Cc: > >> >>>Subject: Re: Why wake up? (Re: [IFWP] Is this list up? (Test, ignore, > >> >>>sorry)) > >> >>> > >> >>>Well to counter your argument I would say that I went to IFWP meetings > >> >>>all over > >> >>>the globe, went to an ICANN meeting or two. I worked on the at-large > >> >>>issue in > >> >>>good faith in the first Membership Advisory Committee. I believe > I was > >> >>>very awake > >> >>>during the entire process, with gusts to diligent. What did all that > >> >>>work get? > >> >>>not much I think. I am not funded to work on lost causes. > >>Those that go to > >> >>>Montevideo are funded to act and more than a couple of them will > have a > >> >>>pre-set > >> >>>agenda. Unless you want to fund everyone on this list to show up > >>and make a > >> >>>presence felt, I think sleeping is the more economical course. > >> >>> > >> >>>Marc Schneiders wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> Why we should wake up fast? Quite a few people are on their way to > >> >>>> Montevideo right now. A couple of them may try to determine a > lot of > >> >>>> things on their own there without real input from those > affected. The > >> >>>> ALSC preliminary report leaves not much hope for a change to the > >> >>>> better. Now, if it would be a good, thorough, well argued report, in > >> >>>> whi > >> >> > >> > > >> >-- > >> > "But at the end of the day, even if you put a calico dress on > >> > it and call it Florence, a pig is still a pig." > >> > -- Bradshaw v. Unity Marine Corp. et al., 2001 U.S. Dist. > >> > LEXIS 8962, (S. D. Tex., 2001). > >> > > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
Re: [IFWP] Reviving this list
Hi Marc, Good job snagging IFWP.org. It needs to be preserved as part of the historical record. Is there any way to get the old web pages back on line? Either that, or a new summary of the IFWP would be great -- something that newcomers could read and immediately understand how the IFWP was hijacked to form ICANN. FWIW, I got a verbal summary online at: http://www.iperdome.com/images/iperdome1.ra Jay. At 9/7/01 05:10 PM, Marc Schneiders wrote: >There are plans, now the domain IFWP.ORG is working again, to revive >the ifwp.org mailing list. More to follow soon. The idea is to let it >be a replacement for the [EMAIL PROTECTED] (earlier >@internic.net) list, that, eh, mmm, let's say, died. > >-- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] +++ Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765 http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World --- "A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men everywhere are trying to suppress it." -- Alvin Toffler
[IFWP] Re: VINT CERF BLOCKS AFILIAS POWER GRAB FOR .WEB
Forwarded with permission: Jay. At 08:22 PM 11/16/00, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: >VINT CERF BLOCKS AFILIAS POWER GRAB FOR .WEB > >Marina Del Rey, CA November 16, 2000 (ICB TOLL FREE NEWS) After >what can only be described as a day of keystone cop chaos, >internet and MCI luminary Vint Cerf dug deep into his pioneer >roots, and blocked NSI-conglomerate Afilias' grab for the >desirable .WEB gTLD, an existing registry operated by Image >Online Design. > >ICANN troublemaker (and Vice-President, Secretary, and General >Counsel) Louis Touton bullied, badgered and smirked his way >through the day, lobbying for his preferred applicant-TLD combo >Afilias and .WEB, he thought triumphantly, apparently oblivious >to his embarrassing public display of indiscretion. > >But in the end, after numerous straw votes the board was >unanimous in its consensus to negotiate with Afilias only on its >second choice TLD, .INFO. > >Cerf was unable to quiet his discomfort at displacing the >existing .WEB, reflecting repeatedly on its function in commerce >for the past four years, as well as its intellectual property >interests in the TLD and its associated service. > >"I'm still interested in IOD," he repeated over Touton's >objections. "They've worked with .WEB for some time. To assign >that to someone else given than they're actually functioning >makes me uneasy," he said, prompting board member Wilson to chime >in, "I agree with Vint." > >Directors Ken Fockler and Esther Dyson expressed their support as >well, whereas board member Fitzsimmons denounced IOD's status. > >"We have to be careful of preregistration," he said, >mischaracterizing IOD's 20,000 active .WEB domain names >registrations. > >"The wrong decision here might set up the wrong incentives and >precedents, encouraging people to set up registries in advance of >applying to ICANN." > >He forgot to add, and paying $50,000 for the privilege. > >While Afilias was not granted .WEB, neither was IOD, which was >excluded in the final board resolution from consideration even >though it is already a working registry in the ORSC rootzone and >has the endorsement of the influential Intellectual Property >Constituency. > >Per the resolution passed, one existing TLD, .BIZ, was assigned >for consideration to JVTeam, a NeuStar company, despite the fact >that .BIZ is already a commercial registry with web-based >registration, and has also been in the ORSC rootzone for more >than 4 years. It's creation date is 1995. > >Despite Fitzsimmons' attempt to brand alternative root operators >as outlaw geeks or worse, the founding members of the ORSC >rootzone include such respected internet players as Anthony M. >Rutkowski, currently VP for Internet Strategy at VeriSign-NSI, >and Kenneth H. Fockler, current ICANN Board Member. > >The board selected "the following proposals for negotiations >toward appropriate agreements between ICANN and the registry >operator or sponsoring organization, or both": > >JVTeam (.biz) >Afilias (.info) >Global Name Registry (.name) >RegistryPro (.pro) >MDMA (.museum) >SITA (.aero) >NCBA (.coop). > >A brief "special" board meeting followed at which Vint Cerf was >named new ICANN Chair. For today at least, he earned it. > >Copyright © 2000 ICB, Inc. All rights reserved. > > >Judith Oppenheimer, 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert >Publisher, http://www.ICBTollFreeNews.com >President, http://www.1800TheExpert.com >FREE 800/Domain Classifieds, http://ICBclassifieds.com >Domain Name & 800 News, Intelligence, Analysis +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Groups Urge ICANN to Keep Promises
SOURCE: The Domain Name Rights Coalition CONTACT: Jay Fenello, Fenello.com, 678-585-9765 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Public Interest Groups join with the DNRC in Urging ICANN To Keep Promises Given Since 1998 - Elect 9 At Large Directors, and Eliminate "Clean Sheet" Study Designed to Abolish At Large Representation HERNDON, VA, November 10, 2000 /PRNewswire/ -- The Domain Name Rights Coalition (DNRC), an organization dedicated to protecting the interests of entrepreneurs, small business owners and individuals in domain name issues, in conjunction with other Public Interest groups such as Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility as well as influential individuals in the area of Domain Names released a letter calling upon ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, to keep their word. In 1998, ICANN pledged to the Department of Commerce that it would never change the bylaws guaranteeing direct elections by the Internet rank-and-file of 9 electors, or half the Board. "We commit that will never happen," wrote Esther Dyson, Chair of ICANN and one of the "Interim" unelected Board members, to the Commerce Department in 1998 as part of ICANN's petition to become stewards of the Domain Name System (DNS). After receiving the contract to manage the DNS, however, ICANN reduced the number of At Large Directors from nine to five, and has announced it will re-examine whether to permit any Internet user representation after the terms of the newly elected directors expire. The letter calls upon ICANN to restore the representation promised to the Internet community since 1998, and renounce its threat to abolish At Large representation. "When ICANN was in serious trouble in 1998 and 1999, they promised open elections for all" said Mikki Barry, President of the Domain Name Rights Coalition. "The Internet Community relied on their word." Barry cited Congressional Testimony of Esther Dyson at an oversight hearing before the House Commerce Committee in 1999, as well as letters to the Commerce Department and members of Congress, as evidence of ICANN's initial insistence it would provide Internet users the right to elect 9 directors. "But once Congress and Commerce seemed satisfied and NSI was brought into the fold, ICANN began a full reversal of their original stance." Barry and other critics warned Commerce in 1998, when it first considered ICANN's proposal, that nothing would stop ICANN from changing its bylaws to keep out the public once Commerce approved ICANN's applications. It was in response to this criticism that Dyson pledged on behalf of ICANN that no such changes would occur. Despite Dyson's pledge in 1998, and similar pledges in 1999, ICANN did change its bylaws, extending the terms of the initial directors, reducing the number of elected directors, and creating a "Clean Sheet" study to re-examine whether to allow Internet users any direct representation at all. When the limited elections ICANN permitted elected two of ICANN's vociferous critics, there was a widespread concern that ICANN might use the Clean Sheet study to eliminate At Large elections altogether, or reduce them further. ICANN's bylaws also have been changed to permit elected At Large directors only 2 years service on the Board with automatic removal at term's end, but "constituency" directors receive 3 year terms and sit until further elections are called. "At the end of two years, the Board may well vote to eliminate At Large, and extend their own terms indefinitely." according to Barry. "Internet Users would have zero say in the very organization that determines their rights." Public interest groups warned ICANN that it would risk its legitimacy if it did not fulfill its promise of nine elected members from the At Large membership. The letter called upon the four remaining "Boardsquatters," the four unelected "Interim" Directors who have extended their terms three times, to resign. It also urged the Board to follow the recommendations of Professor Michael Froomkin and allow the five democratically elected directors from the At Large to fill the four vacancies until new At Large elections could fill them. Professor Froomkin's proposal is available at http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/boardsquat2.htm The DNRC letter can be seen at http://www.netpolicy.com/icann111000.html. The letter has already sparked a lively debate. Hans Klein, Chair of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), cited the letter extensively in a panel discussion at the on-going ICANN meetings in Marina del Rey, where ICANN Board will soon decide how to proceed with the study. "The prospect of a clean-sheet study is a significant departure from ICANN's prior commitments,"
[IFWP] More history ...
More history ... At 12:52 PM 9/26/97 , Jay Fenello wrote: >FYI, > >Has Don come to his senses? > > > >The Wall Street Journal 09/19/97 00:00 > Technology and Telecommunications -- > Net Interest: A Plan To Change the Name Game > By Jennifer L. Schenker > (Copyright (c) 1997, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) > > > >And last week in Geneva, where an [Internet] trade show was >held, one of the plan's original backers caused a stir by declaring it >flawed; he claimed the proposed system had legal problems and hadn't had >enough consultation. Then he declined -- at least until the faults are >fixed -- to sign a legal document that would have set the system in >motion. > >"I am not going to go down in history as the one that screwed up" the >way the [Internet] works by signing a flawed [domain-name] agreement, >huffed the defector, Donald Heath, head of the [Internet] Society, an >international organization that coordinates [Internet] policy and >technology. He flew back to the U.S. vowing to get Washington to get >off the sidelines and take a stance on the issue. > >Mr. Heath's declaration passes for high drama in the geeky [Internet] >world -- and his change of heart adds to a litany of problems for the >reform plan that may delay its implementation beyond the planned >February start date. Among the many complaints, from many [Internet] >service companies and Net experts: The new system could worsen the >current international trademark disputes that arise when more than >one company in more than one country lays claim to the same Net >address. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Fwd: IAHC-gate
he Internet Mail Consortium, an industry > >>trade association. He is also a principal with Brandenburg > >>Consulting in Sunnyvale, Ca., a firm specializing in guiding the development > >>and use of Internet applications. With ten years in the ARPA > >>research community, ten years developing commercial network products and > >>services, and extensive contributions to the Internet Engineering > >>Task Force, he is considered an expert about the Internet, email, electronic > >>commerce, Internet operation and the Internet standards process. > >> > >> Geoff Huston is the technical manager of Australia's Telstra Internet and > >>is responsible for the architecture and operations of its service. He > >>formerly was technical manager of the Australian Academic and Research > >>Network, and was largely responsible for the introduction and > >>subsequent development of the Internet into Australia. > >> > >> David W. Maher, a partner at the law firm of Sonnenschein Nath & > >>Rosenthal, of Chicago, IL, is a registered patent attorney and has > >>extensive experience in intellectual property and entertainment law. > >>Principal outside trademark counsel for several nationwide companies, he > >>has served as special counsel to the American Bar Association for > >>telecommunications matters. > >> > >> Perry E. Metzger is the president of New York - based Piermont Information > >>Systems Inc., a consulting firm specializing in communications > >>and computer systems security. He has worked with the New York financial > >>community for many years and is active in the Internet Engineering > >>Task Force's (IETF) security area, chairing the group's Simple Public Key > >>Infrastructure working group. > >> > >> Jun Murai is an associate professor on the Faculty of Environmental > >>Information at Keio University in Tokyo. He developed JUNET, Japan's > >>first UUCP network and the WIDE Internet, Japan's first IP network. He is > >>president of the Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) and > >>serves as adjunct professor at the Institute of Advanced Studies of the > >>United Nations University in Tokyo. > >> > >> Hank Nussbacher, an independent networking consultant, currently works > >>with IBM Israel as Internet Technology Manager and has been > >>responsible for all aspects in establishing IBM Israel as a major ISP in > >>Israel. He also consults for the Israeli inter-university consortium and is > >>on > >>the board of directors of the Internet Society of Israel. > >> > >> Robert Shaw is an advisor on Global Information Infrastructure (GII) > >>issues at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ITU, > >>based in Geneva, Switzerland, is a United Nations treaty organization within > >>which governments and the private sector coordinate global > >>telecom networks and services. > >> > >> George Strawn is with the US National Science Foundation (NSF), which has > >>funded Internet development for research and education. Mr. > >>Strawn has been involved with the NSF's Internet activities for the last > >>five years and also co-chairs the Federal Networking Council, a US > >>government committee coordinating inter-agency Internet activities, > >>including funding for administrative activities, such as the Internet > >>Assigned > >>Numbers Authority (IANA). > >> > >> Albert Tramposch is senior legal counsellor at the World Intellectual > >>Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva. WIPO is a United Nations > >>organization which has responsibility for the promotion of the protection of > >>intellectual property throughout the world. It also administers various > >>treaties dealing with legal and administrative aspects of intellectual > >>property, including the international registration of trademarks. > >> > >>Best Regards, > >> > >> > >>-- > >>"Success is not measured by what a man accomplishes, but by > >>the opposition he has encountered, and the courage with which > >>he maintained the struggle against overwhelming odds." > >> - Charles A. Lindbergh > >> > >> > >> > >-- >"Success is not measured by what a man accomplishes, but by >the opposition he has encountered, and the courage with which >he maintained the struggle against overwhelming odds." > - Charles A. Lindbergh +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] As Worlds Collide
As Worlds Collide By Jay Fenello An Aligning With Purpose(sm) Column As I sit here and watch the days go by, I am constantly amazed at the many ways that the Internet is changing our world. Today, most of these changes are subtle, and not so easy to recognize. Tomorrow, these small changes may quickly lead us into a brave new world. Just what this world might look like, remains to be seen. For example... Today, I can legally record a song off of the radio, and give it to a friend. I can legally record a TV show when I'm out, and watch it when I return. Tomorrow, I may not -- Napster is challenging our concepts of copyright protection and "fair use" in a digital world. Today, I can legally write almost anything I want, and distribute it to thousands of people for $19.95 a month. I can legally use almost any word in a sentence, without worrying about my entire article being censured. Tomorrow, I may not -- the trademark lobby is challenging our concepts of trademark use on the World Wide Web. Today, I can vote for someone to represent me in the world's first Internet governance body. Tomorrow, I may not -- ICANN is challenging our concept of self governance in cyberspace. What we have here is a collision between two worlds -- the "real" world and the "cyber" one. And even though these worlds are similar, what seemed to work in the real world, doesn't seem to apply in the cyber one. Is it because the Internet allows us to see things we never saw before? Is it because the Internet includes people who never participated in these decisions before? Whatever the reason, trying to solve our cyber-world problems with traditional real-world solutions, often results in more questions about both! As an example, and in case you haven't heard, for the first time in recorded history, people from around the world have voted for someone to represent them in a world governance body -- namely, ICANN. Now granted, ICANN is a very bad form of governance. It makes its decisions in smoke filled rooms, it pursues an agenda that favors insiders, it makes up the rules as it goes, and it changes the rules it doesn't like -- usually after it has already violated them. Even so, the vote was relatively fair (as certified by the Carter Center), and it was relatively surprising -- out of the five designated regions, two of the representatives elected have been labeled "radical" by the press. By radical, I presume they mean someone who wants to drastically change the current situation. But what's so radical about protecting people's rights, anyway? About following rules, and living up to people's best expectations? Why are *these* radical concepts? If they are radical concepts, what does that say about our "traditional" values? And if they aren't, what does that say about our press? Once again, when we try and solve our cyber-world problems with traditional real-world solutions, we often end-up with more questions about both! Why did we elect radicals to the ICANN board? Maybe it was because we had a choice -- not just a few token candidates dressed up in different parties (i.e. the Gush and Bore syndrome). Or maybe it's just a backlash against the corporate excesses that have driven the ICANN takeover to date. Or maybe, it's because we are about to go pop! We are about to understand things about our world, that we have never understood before. And maybe, just maybe, we are about to create a better one along the way. Until next time . . . +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World -------- "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity Copyright (c) 2000 Jay Fenello -- All rights reserved Permission is hereby granted to 1) redistribute this column in its entirety via email, discussion lists, and newsgroups, and 2) publish this column in its entirety on non-profit web sites. To join in the discussion on the topics in this column, subscribe to the Aligning with Purpose(sm) discussion list by sending a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To receive future issues of this column, subscribe to the Aligning with Purpose(sm) announcements list by sending a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IFWP] Re: Ken Stubbs @ core deletes vote-auction.com
At 10:31 AM 11/3/00, Jim Dixon wrote: >Nevertheless, what has happened here demonstrates a basic flaw at the >heart of the domain name system. ICANN and many essential Internet >resources remain subject to US jurisdiction. ICANN itself is just a >California corporation, so it is subject to the passing whims of the >California legislature as well as those of Congress, the executive >branches, and various and sundry US state and federal courts. > >Some argue that ICANN should itself have authority over all of the >Internet domain name system and the IP address space and in fact >things are creeping in this direction. Given the now-crucial role >that the Internet plays in the global economy, ICANN's hegemony >gives, for example, representatives of small towns in California sitting >on the right committee in Sacramento remarkable and truly unique power >over the rest of the planet. Hi Jim, When exploring ICANN's hegemony (aka domination) over the Internet, you can't help but explore how power and control is expressed in the real world. In response to one of my recent postings, someone commented on my latest sig file with this URL: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/Whole_Earth_Review/Escaping_the_Matrix.shtml To learn more, just "follow the white rabbit" :-) Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Re: Froomkin Wrong On No GCCA Violation
Hi Michael, I've recently come to realize that our legal system is either broken, or it just can't keep up with the changes in our society. In ICANN, we have the world's first, global governance body, established by a world-wide process conducted by the U.S. Department of Commerce. And virtually everything about it is embroiled in controversy. Why? Because virtually everything about it seems to be Gamed. Fixed. somehow Dishonest. Now, I don't says these things to get anyone in trouble. I say them to highlight a problem that *must* be fixed. (I feel so strongly about this, I even suggest amnesty for anyone involved in any of these activities.) The more important point is, we must fix our problems. And I'm not just talking about ICANN . . . ICANN has shown us how our Government can lie to its people. How its investigative arms and legal machinations can fail to serve their purpose. ICANN has shown us how our Government really works, in secret committees, and in collusion with the other governments, large corporations, and the press. ICANN has shown us how our most prestigious universities and non-profit foundations, can be a part of the problem, as easily as a part of the solution. Worst of all, ICANN has shown us that these excesses are commonplace and protected, so much so that only a handful seem to even care. One of the unique aspects of the U.S. Constitution, is its recognition of Divine Law, that which we all know as true in the heart of our souls. It's the law that all legitimate human laws try to emulate. What our founding fathers knew, we have forgotten. And it's time to remember. Jay. At 12:59 AM 10/28/00, Michael Sondow wrote: >In his most recent article (Duke Law Journal 50:17, and available at >http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin), Mr. Froomkin writes that >the creation of ICANN did not violate federal laws and specifically >was not in violation of the Government Corporation Control Act >(GCCA). Mr. Froomkin writes: > >"Any participation by the federal >government in ICANNs formation beyond general cheerleading >would probably have violated the Government Corporation Control >Act (GCCA). However, most of the board members appear to have >been recruited either by European Union officials or by Joe Sims, >Postels lawyer and later ICANNs." > >and > >"...because >the formation was kept at arms length, ICANNs creation did >not violate the Government Corporation Control Act, the statute >designed >to prevent agencies from creating private corporations to do >their will." > >and > >"By calling for NewCo to form spontaneously, >government officials avoided directly "creating" the corporation." > >However, Mr. Froomkin is wrong. He is either unaware of the facts >and the evidence which proves those facts, or has chosen to ignore >them. Esther Dyson herself was called to the chairmanship of the >ICANN board by none other than Ira Magaziner, in collusion with >Roger Cochetti of IBM, as Esther Dyson's own statements prove >(http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.asp?s=REAL&dir=icann&file=icann1&start=1-22-00&end=2-14-50). > > >Ms. Dyson furthermore stated that ICANN was about to be recognized >by the Department of Commerce at the time of the recorded meeting, >which was ICANN's first and which was held when there had not yet >been any acceptance of ICANN by stakeholders and there were still >competing proposals for the NewCo, thus proving the DOC's de facto >creation of ICANN. > >The ICIIU hereby warns the Berkman Center and ICANN that any attempt >at destruction of the evidence is a violation of U.S. Code Sec.18 § >1001(a)(1) (see below) and that they will be prosecuted for doing >so. > >Michael Sondow >= >Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, >legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United >States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers >up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact shall be fined >under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. > --- 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(1) >===== > International Congress of Independent Internet Users >http://www.iciiu.org(ICIIU)[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Tel(718)846-7482Fax(603)754-8927 >= +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] "DEMOCRACY NOW!" IN DANGER
KPFT >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >-- > >Feel free to respond to FAIR ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). We can't reply to >everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate >documented example of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of >your email correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to us >at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > >FAIR ON THE AIR: FAIR's founder Jeff Cohen is a regular panelist on the Fox >News Channel's "Fox News Watch," which airs which airs Saturdays at 7 pm and >Sundays at 11 am (Eastern Standard Time). Check your local listings. > >FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 120 stations in >the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest you, visit >http://www.fair.org/counterspin/stations.html . > >Please support FAIR by subscribing to our bimonthly magazine, Extra! >For more information, go to: >http://www.fair.org/extra/subscribe.html . Or call 1-800-847-3993. > >FAIR's INTERNSHIP PROGRAM: FAIR accepts internship applications for its New >York office on a rolling basis. For more information, please e-mail Peter >Hart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > >You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site: http://www.fair.org , or by >sending a "subscribe FAIR-L enter your full name" command to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Our subscriber list is kept confidential. > >You may leave the list at any time-- just send a message with "SIGNOFF >FAIR-L" in the body to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > FAIR > (212) 633-6700 > http://www.fair.org/ > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >list administrators: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] A Chronology
I've recently had some correspondence that helps to fill in some of the time line behind the formation of ICANN. Here's the view from 20,000 feet: (Comments and corrections welcome) Postel 1, Postel 2, the Alternic the IAHC, eDNS, the Domain Name Wars. the NOI, the Green Paper. Media blackout, Collusion w/Governments & Corps. IANA transition negotiated (April) IANA transition planned (May). Public smoke screen (White Paper) announced. Mike Roberts and friends entertain the rabble, while Board members are selected, and the by-laws are drafted behind closed doors. ICANN announced, Ira Magaziner resigns, Commerce holds pretend conference calls between ICANN and ORSC and BWG. ICANN proceeds to make the most egregious decisions, exactly as ORSC and BWG had warned it might do. "Members" at Large finally get a say and elect two ICANN critics to its board. Stay tuned . . . Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Wake up, Neo... The Matrix has you..." -- Trinity
[IFWP] Fwd: Re: Pre-emptive Registrations
From Domain Policy: >Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:32:39 -0400 >To: Ron Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Pre-emptive Registrations >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >At 11:26 PM 10/11/00, Ron Bennett wrote: >>Another possibility which is *NOT* related to >>anything I posted above is that some domain >>registration services SELL/DISTRIBUTE their >>user logs to third parties and/or use their logs >>in unethical ways. >> >>So for example, a person checks a domain that's >>*never* been registered and sees that it's >>available, but they decide to wait until later to >>actually register it. In the meantime that >>particular registration service may for example >>sell their user logs to domain speculators. The >>domain speculators will then examine those >>logs and from that information may register >>domains that people had merely checked for >>availability but didn't actually register yet for >>whatever reason. > > >Bingo! > >Thanks Ron. > >Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] Re: [bwg+] Pre-emptive Registrations
Hi Jamie, The reporter asked me the same thing. Even if it is not illegal, it certainly seems unethical. I suspect it is counter to the registrar agreement as well, but we have seen registrars "work" with other domain name warehousers in the past. In other words, it would be relatively easy to get around such rules, unless someone was aggressively monitoring the situation. Jay. At 10:02 PM 10/11/00, James Love wrote: >We have seen this too, and have been warned about it. Is this a >violation of an ICANN registration rules? Jamie > > >Jay Fenello wrote: > > > > Infoworld is researching multiple reports > > from people who have checked on domain names > > that were available, only to find later that > > they were registered shortly after their > > inquiry. > > > > Anyone having similar experiences, or having > > insight into why this might be happening, > > should contact: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 408-267-1721 > > > > Jay. > > > > +++ > > > > Jay Fenello, > > New Media Strategies > > > > http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 > > Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World > > > > "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle > > between corporate globalization and popular democracy." > > http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml > > -- David Korten > >-- >James Love, Consumer Project on Technology >v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 >[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.cptech.org +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Pre-emptive Registrations
Infoworld is researching multiple reports from people who have checked on domain names that were available, only to find later that they were registered shortly after their inquiry. Anyone having similar experiences, or having insight into why this might be happening, should contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 408-267-1721 Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Did this turn into ICANN?
Did this turn into ICANN? http://www.iperdome.com/responses/testimony.htm On May 19th (weeks before the White Paper was announced), Jon Postel issued a memo to Daniel Karrenberg at RIPE describing actions he had taken to reorganize and restructure the IANA organization. Just like the IAHC process before it, there appears to be a secret and coordinated attempt to take over Internet governance by the same people who were behind the MoU. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] TLD Application Irregularities
Hello Esther, Mike, et al. Could someone please explain the following lapse in your TLD application process? On October 2nd, ICANN posted the following: >http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm > >As of 5:00 pm California time on Monday, 2 October 2000, application materials >seeking to operate or sponsor the new TLDs listed below were submitted to ICANN. >These applications have not yet been verified to be complete or to be in proper form. >(There may be missing parts of the application, omitted attachments, no or an >inadequate application fee, a transmittal not in the specified form, a lack of >required signatures, etc.) Requests for confidential treatment of material submitted >have not yet been evaluated according to the procedure outlined in Section I of the >Statement of Requested Confidential Treatment of Materials Submitted. Nor has ICANN >yet made any determinations, where multiple TLD strings are included in a single >application, whether to require the applicant to elect which of the strings to pursue >in the application. [Note: While ICANN admitted that the applications had not been reviewed, and they might not be complete, it did *not* indicate that there might be some other applications hidden in its system!!!] Then, on October 3rd, ICANN posted: >http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm > >Note: On 3 October 2000, we revised this list to add two mistakenly omitted >applications and to make minor corrections to some TLD and applicant data. Could someone please document why: JVTeam, LLC 1120 Vermont Avenue., NW Washington, DC 20005 USA Ken Hansen +1 202 533-2600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] and NeuStar, Inc. 1120 Vermont Avenue., NW Washington, DC 20005 USA Ken Hansen +1 202 533-2600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] had applications recognized the day *after* the application deadline? Thanks in advance, Jay. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "The refusal of the ICANN junta to relinquish to others the institutions they claim to have built is itself the most damning condemnation of their work." -- Ted Byfield
[IFWP] Re: Don't shoot the messenger (was Where Does Lessig Stand?)
Hi Ellen, While we all appreciate your note-taking for two among the many Steering Committee meetings, your minutes do not reflect the many other communications that revolved around the destruction of the wrap-up meeting. Given all that was known to me at the time (much of which occurred after the record you have provided), I stand by the statements that I have articulated in this exchange. And while it might seem like we're flogging a dead horse, I believe that the failure of the wrap-up meeting was the pivotal point in the failure of the ICANN process -- it lead to the acceptance of the IANA by-laws, and the stealth appointment of the "interim" board. IMHO & FWIW, every other problem with ICANN is a direct result of this failure! Jay. At 01:56 PM 9/19/00, Ellen Rony wrote: >On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Jay Fenello wrote: > > > >He therefore informed me that there > > >was no further reason to negotiate, as there was no continuing > > >organizational support from IFWP for the final meeting. At this stage, > > >though NSI was strongly pushing for a final meeting as well, NSI decided it > > >was more prudent simply to enter a negotiation with IANA. IFWP fell into > > >apparent disarray, as the support from them for the final meeting had been > > >compromised. > >On Tues, 19 Sep 200, Jim Dixon wrote: > > > > This is where Berkman could have provided > > assistance, but instead, took the easy way > > out. > > > > >While it may seem like we are flogging a dead horse to spend any more time >to discussing the fateful wrap-up IFWP meeting, it is clearly an issue that >continues to ignite controversy among those who had such high hopes for the >IFWP process. > >As years pass, memory is often transmuted Kurosawa-like by the filter of >one's subsequent knowledge, experiences and aspirations. That said, I >believe both Jim Dixon and Jay Fenello have posted accurate accounts as >known to them through their participation on the IFWP Steering Committees. >Where we diverge is in our assessment of Berkman's role or obligations at >that crossroads. > >I was scribe for the final two meetings of the Steering Committee. My role >was to capture as fully and accurately as possible what transpired in a >global teleconference simultaneously taking place at 3 p.m. in Germany, 6 >a.m. from my California perch and 9 p.m. the previous evening in Asia. > >After taking those notes, I offered every teleconference participant the >opportunity to review them for errors. The minutes are posted on my >website because, despite numerous requests for instructions about where to >send or post them, no guidance was forthcoming. The Steering Committee >apparently felt its work was done and there was little interest in this >residual piece of the historical IFWP record. > >I do not agree with those who have pilloried the Berkman Center by >asserting that it caused the demise of the wrap-up meeting. This is akin >to shooting the messenger. Nor do I believe it was Berkman's place to >push for a meeting absent the two major players. As Jonathan Zittrain made >clear to members of the Steering Committee, "We are disposable parties >here." > >Berkman offered a venue for an editorial meeting that was to precede a >ratification meeting, and thus Berkman was closely involved in its >logistical coordination. Yes, the SC was surprised by the information >Jonathan Zittrain presented at the September 5, 1998 teleconference. >However, it is not right to place the domino effect of IANA's and NSI's >machinations and negotiations at the time upon Berkman's shoulders. >Someone was tasked with providing updates to the SC. That task fell to >Berkman. > >The SC, as the coordinating body of the IFWP process, had a an opportunity >to tell IANA and NSI that it was serving a larger community and the >meetings would proceed with or without them.It chose not to do so. > >The proposed bylaws had been through four iterations by then (including a >proposal from NSI). Another proposal drafted absent input from either IANA >or NSI would never pass muster with the Department of Commerce. > >Those who fault Berkman for the demise of the wrap-up need to look >elsewhere. And one must ask, would a wrap-up meeting have changed the >outcome we have today? IMHO, not likely. Would it have changed how the >interim ICANN board was chosen. IMHO, not likely. Humans have a fondness >for closure, but that's not likely to be forthcoming any time soon on >matters relevant to the curious and debatable birth of ICANN. > > > > >[snip] > > > >You have stated, fa
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] Re: Where Does Lessig Stand?
slim majority. The only time the Steering Committee was in disarray, was when the Berkman Center surprised everyone by calling off the final meeting. >You may rightly say I blew it. And you might rightly say I blew it because I >trusted Sims to be negotiating in good faith. Those would be fair charges, >and I have been more critical of myself that you would ever be for exactly >this reason. But my willingness to take another at his word is quite >different from saying the Berkman center was instrumental in the demise of >IFWP. The lack of resolve of some IFWP board members was more than enough to >lead to its own demise; Berkman -- not IFWP, NSI, or IANA -- was the last >actor still pushing for a final IFWP meeting, but our commitment to the >process was to facilitate what these parties wanted. These parties got >exactly what they wanted. (A note for the record: having been slapped once, >I will just say that there is no other cheek for me to turn.) Again, Tamar's negotiations with the Berkman Center were not extended to the Steering Committee. Much of what you have revealed here (for the first time, as a matter of fact) was a black box to us. For this reason, to claim that the IFWP process got exactly what we wanted is technically incorrect. NOTE: Tamar Frankel ended up as a Berkman fellow shortly after the collapse of the IFWP process. >You said: "Then why didn't you [criticize ICANN] at the time, and use your >professional license and your influence to correct or stop it?" Again, you >are wrong about the facts. I did precisely that. The first article I >published in the Standard was exactly on that point; I gave a number of >talks at the time pushing the same argument, and I said the same to everyone >who would listen. But again, it is just not surprising that an organization >that had won the support of the US government, and key support from Europe, >and most powerful internet companies did not simply fold because a law >professor criticized it. This is a fair assessment of the situation, and one of the reasons that I still have the utmost respect for you, Larry :-) Good luck on your campaign, and give 'em hell if you win. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] The Promise of the Interent
The Promise of the Internet By Jay Fenello An Aligning With Purpose(sm) Column Over the last couple of months, I've been trying to write an update about ICANN, the world's new Internet Governance body. It's not that I've had nothing to say, it's just that nothing has changed -- ICANN is still behaving very badly, and it is still marching forward without any opposition from those in a position to stop it. In fact, in a recent radio interview on the topic <http://www.programs.wfcr.com/pm091200.ram>, one of the DJ's asked me what people could do to stop ICANN? I am sorry to say, I had *no* suggestions! Imagine the implications of this statement. We have just finished establishing the world's first Internet Governance body, and it is corrupt. Has been from day one. (It was founded through a corrupt process!) And there is nothing we can do about it!!! Truth of the matter is, ICANN exists because it was supported by the U.S. Government, by huge multinational corporations, and by the elite media. (See comments by Larry Lessig, famed legal scholar and candidate for the ICANN Board <http://www.egroups.com/message/awpd/150>.) That ICANN exists, and that it continues to behave badly, are both very troubling. More importantly though, is what these facts say about our government? About our media? About our judicial system? If any of these institutions worked as our mythology would have us believe, ICANN would not be a problem today. But ICANN does exist, and it is a problem. This transfer of regulatory authority from a sovereign nation to a supra-national NGO is certainly a trend these days. Consider for a moment the WTO (World Trade Organization). It operates on the same model as ICANN, and is supported by the same cast of characters. (see the Harvard interview for similarities: <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is99/governance/fenello.html#wto>). But why? Why is the U.S. Government working with multinational corporations and the elite media to further an agenda that is destroying our civil rights and our national sovereignty in the process? Here's my theory: Throughout history, there has always been an "upper class" who has made decisions for everyone else. When this upper class has been "enlightened," the countries have prospered in peace and prosperity. When this upper class has been "corrupted" with unlimited power, it has been the worst of times. The difference between an "enlightened" and a "corrupted" upper class is often the degree of power they hold over their subjects, and the degree of control they hold over information. (Absolute power, and all that . . .) Our history includes many examples of people controlling information in order to control the populace. Some examples include the power of the church before the Reformation, and the power of the fascist state during World War II. In both examples, the power structure depended on the control of information. So what does this say about our current situation? First, we must realize that power is fleeting, and it is always cycling between consolidation and dispersion. In fact, since our country's birth, there have been many cycles of power consolidation and dispersion. (Consider the trust busting activities of Teddy Roosevelt.) Second, we must also realize that technology is a great destabilizer of power. (Consider how the printing press helped people like Martin Luther expose the hypocrisy of the church, leading to its eventual decline.) Finally, changes in power structures that result from changes in technology can not be stopped! If the existing power structure recognizes that the changes are inevitable, they can embrace the changes and share in the new order. If the existing power structure holds on too tightly, the changes can be violent and deadly. (Compare how England and France transitioned from monarchies to modern states: The English monarchy retained some power in a peaceful evolution, while the French monarchy was beheaded in a violent revolution). Over the last several decades, we have seen tremendous growth in the power and influence of the modern corporation. And as these corporations have grown in power, they have also changed the rules of the game. What was once considered bribery, is now called "soft money." And what was once a government by the people, for the people, now seems to be a government for large corporations, by large corporations. Consider the special gifts that large corporations receive from publicly financed initiatives (what Ralph Nader calls "corporate welfare"). We see it in the gifting of Internet assets to the *right* corporations, and we see it in the gifting of huge blocks of radio spectrum to broadcasters). And consider those special gifts that help the existing power structure retain cont
[IFWP] The Enlightenment
Excerpts from: http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/enlightenment.html "This is one reason that Americans should study the Enlightenment. It is in their bones. It has defined part of what they have dreamed of, what they aim to become." The Enlightenment Although the intellectual movement called "The Enlightenment" is usually associated with the 18th century, its roots in fact go back much further. This is one of those rare historical movements which in fact named itself. Certain thinkers and writers, primarily in London and Paris, believed that they were more enlightened than their compatriots and set out to enlighten them. They believed that human reason could be used to combat ignorance, superstition, and tyranny and to build a better world. Their principal targets were religion (embodied in France in the Catholic Church) and the domination of society by a hereditary aristocracy. The 17th century was torn by witch-hunts and wars of religion and imperial conquest. Protestants and Catholics denounced each other as followers of Satan, and people could be imprisoned for attending the wrong church, or for not attending any. All publications, whether pamphlets or scholarly volumes, were subject to prior censorship by both church and state, often working hand in hand. Slavery was widely practiced, especially in the colonial plantations of the Western Hemisphere, and its cruelties frequently defended by leading religious figures. The despotism of monarchs exercising far greater powers than any medieval king was supported by the doctrine of the "divine right of kings," and scripture quoted to show that revolution was detested by God. Speakers of sedition or blasphemy quickly found themselves imprisoned, or even executed. Organizations which tried to challenge the twin authorities of church and state were banned. There had been plenty of intolerance and dogma to go around in the Middle Ages, but the emergence of the modern state made its tyranny much more efficient and powerful. During the late Middle Ages, peasants had begun to move from rural estates to the towns in search of increased freedom and prosperity. As trade and communication improved during the Renaissance, the ordinary town-dweller began to realize that things need not always go on as they had for centuries. New charters could be written, new governments formed, new laws passed, new businesses begun. Although each changed institution quickly tried to stabilize its power by claiming the support of tradition, the pressure for change continued to mount. It was not only contact with alien cultural patterns which influenced Europeans, it was the wealth brought back from Asia and the Americas which catapulted a new class of merchants into prominence, partially displacing the old aristocracy whose power had been rooted in the ownership of land. These merchants had their own ideas about the sort of world they wanted to inhabit, and they became major agents of change, in the arts, in government, and in the economy. But the chief obstacles to the reshaping of Europe by the merchant class were the same as those faced by the rationalist philosophers: absolutist kings and dogmatic churches. The struggle was complex and many-sided, with each participant absorbing many of the others' values; but the general trend is clear: individualism, freedom and change replaced community, authority, and tradition as core European values. Religion survived, but weakened and often transformed almost beyond recognition; the monarchy was to dwindle over the course of the hundred years beginning in the mid-18th century to a pale shadow of its former self. Many of the most distinguished leaders of the American revolution--Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, Paine--were powerfully influenced by Enlightenment thought. Jefferson and Franklin both spent time in France--a natural ally because it was a traditional enemy of England--absorbing the influence of the French Enlightenment. The language of natural law, of inherent freedoms, of self-determination which seeped so deeply into the American grain was the language of the Enlightenment, though often coated with a light glaze of traditional religion, what has been called our "civil religion." Today the Enlightenment is often viewed as a historical anomaly, a brief moment when a number of thinkers infatuated with reason vainly supposed that the perfect society could be built on common sense and tolerance, a fantasy which collapsed amid the Terror of the French Revolution and the triumphal sweep of Romanticism. Yet in many ways, the Enlightenment has never been more alive. The notions of human rights it developed are powerfully attractive to oppressed peoples everywhere, who appeal to the same notion of natural law that so inspired Voltaire and Jefferson. +++ Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies
[IFWP] More David Post on ICANN
he >sort of question we place, under the 7th Amendment, before the jury to decide. > >I dont minimize the difficulties that we might face in trying to get this >institution off the ground. How should UDRP juries be chosen? Whats the >appropriate pool of jurors? What about language problems? How might we get people >to view jury service in cyberspace as a kind of civic obligation (and avoid the >situation where only people with too much time on their hands actually agree to >serve)? > >But this is too serious a matter to give up without a fight. The problems are not, I >suspect, insurmountable and we wont know, in any event, until we try a lot harder >than we have up to now to solve them. Im going to prepare a formal submission to >ICANN on how we might accomplish this, and I urge any of you who might be interested >in working on this to get in touch with me (at [EMAIL PROTECTED]). > >You might be thinking that this is all much ado about nothing. It is surely true >that, when all is said and done, the UDRP deals with a pretty narrow slice of legal >questions of little concern to most people. Efforts to figure out how to make this a >more legitimate process might seem hardly worth the trouble. > >The UDRP, though, is just the opening wedge, the first step in what will likely be a >long journey towards the design of the new set of legal institutions that will be >setting rules and creating a degree of order for the global network. For better or >for worse, this private law-making model is likely to serve as a template for other, >more complex and more significant issues, whether administered through ICANN and the >domain name system or otherwise. Well be sorry very sorry, I think -- if we dont >get it right. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] The Purchase of the APA == Why Non-Profits Support ICANN
wed to diagnose and recommend treatment to those in the NAMI organization with whom he disagrees. Clearly, a violation of medical ethics. Does APA protest? Of course not, because he is speaking what APA agrees with but can't explicitly espouse. He is allowed to be a foil; after all he is no longer a member of APA. (Slick work APA!) The shortsightedness of this marriage of convenience between APA, NAMI and the drug companies (who gleefully support both groups because of their shared pro-drug stance) is an abomination. I want no part of a psychiatry of oppression and social control. Biologically based brain diseases are convenient for families and practitioners alike. It is no fault insurance against personal responsibility. We are just helplessly caught up in a swirl of brain pathology for which no one, except DNA, is responsible. Now, to begin with, anything that has an anatomically defined specific brain pathology becomes the province of neurology (syphilis is an excellent example). So, to be consistent with this "brain disease" view all the major psychiatric disorders would become the territory of our neurologic colleagues. Without having surveyed them I believe they would eschew responsibility for these problematic individuals. However, consistency would demand our giving over "biologic brain diseases" to them. The fact that there is no evidence confirming the brain disease attribution is, at this point, irrelevant. What we are dealing with here is fashion, politics and money. This level of intellectual/scientific dishonesty is just too egregious for me to continue to support by my membership. I view with no surprise that psychiatric training is being systemically disavowed by American medical school graduates. This must give us cause for concern about the state of today's psychiatry. It must mean, at least in part, that they view psychiatry as being very limited and unchallenging. To me it seems clear that we are headed toward a situation in which, except for academics, most psychiatric practitioners will have no real relationships, so vital to the healing process, with the disturbed and disturbing persons they treat. Their sole role will be that of prescription writers, ciphers in the guise of being "helpers". Finally, why must the APA pretend to know more than it does? DSM IV is the fabrication upon which psychiatry seeks acceptance by medicine in general. Insiders know it is more a political than scientific document. To its credit it says so, although its brief apologia is rarely noted. DSM IV has become a bible and a money making best seller - its major failings notwithstanding. It confines and defines practice, some take it seriously, others more realistically. It is the way to get paid. Diagnostic reliability is easy to attain for research projects. The issue is what do the categories tell us? Do they in fact accurately represent the person with a problem? They don't, and can't, because there are no external validating criteria for psychiatric diagnoses. There is neither a blood test nor specific anatomic lesions for any major psychiatric disorder. So, where are we? APA as an organization has implicitly (sometimes explicitly as well) bought into a theoretical hoax. Is psychiatry a hoax, as practiced today? What do I recommend to the organization upon leaving after experiencing three decades of its history? 1.. To begin with, let us be ourselves. Stop taking on unholy alliances without the members' permission. 2.. Get real about science, politics and money. Label each for what it is - that is, be honest. 3.. Get out of bed with NAMI and the drug companies. APA should align itself, if one believes its rhetoric, with the true consumer groups, i. e., the ex-patients, psychiatric survivors etc. 4.. Talk to the membership; I can't be alone in my views. We seem to have forgotten a basic principle: the need to be patient/client/consumer satisfaction oriented. I always remember Manfred Bleuler's wisdom: "Loren, you must never forget that you are your patient's employee." In the end they will determine whether or not psychiatry survives in the service marketplace. Sincerely, Loren R. Mosher M. D. Home Oikos Ecology of Mind Co-ordination page Antipsychiatry Links Kelly Maturana Von Glasersfeld Laing Bateson Learn more about me & then some! http://www.interport.net/~rugosa/index.html BETTER LIVING Thru BeTTeR LiviNG! GABRIELLI WINERY of MENDOCINO, CA http://www.interport.net/~rugosa/gabriell.html Exquisite Hand-crafted Viogniers & Cal-Italia wines at Homespun prices. http://www.gabrielliwinery.com Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the
[IFWP] Out Of Balance
Here's another one: Out Of Balance ICANN Has Reserved All The Best Seats For The Corporate Elite by Sandra Kegel It is becoming clearer by the day that there is little prospect of real democracy in the first global on-line ballot, to be held between Oct. 1 and Oct. 10. The unique event is in danger of becoming a farce, even before the final list of candidates is known. Read the rest at . . . http://www.commondreams.org/views/080400-102.htm Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Constitutional Compromises . . .
Here's another one . . . >At 05:26 PM 8/2/98, Jay Fenello wrote: >Here are the top five compromises made to ratify >the U.S. Constitution (based on "American History >in 100 Nutshells" by Tad Tuleja): > >1) "Large State" vs. "Small State" > >Should the states be represented in Congress on the >basis of population or equally, as under the existing >Articles? The compromise was to fashion a two-house >Congress, with the upper house going the "small state" >route, the lower to the "large state" route. Hence the >Senate and the House of Representatives, respectively. > >2) Slave vs. Free > >Should "all men," as the Declaration implied, be counted >in apportioning taxes and representatives, or should >slaves be considered less than "men"? The compromise >was to allow each of the South's millions of slaves to >count as three-fifths of a person. > >3) Direct or Indirect Elections > >Should the president be elected directly by all the >people -- thus opening the way to mob rule and demagogy >-- or should more "qualified" people be chosen to make >the decisions? The compromise was the creation of the >electoral college, whose members, chosen by the states, >actually vote for the president. > >4) Congress vs. the Executive. > >Who should rule, the legislature or the president? The >compromise was that Congress was given the power to pass >laws, while the president could only recommend them. The >president, on the other hand, could veto Congress's wishes >-- unless they overrode his negation by a two thirds >majority. > >5) Federalist vs. States' Rights > >Should the central government or the individual states be >supreme? The compromise was to approve the Constitution >upon two-thirds of the states' conventions. > > >Regards, > >Jay Fenello >President, Iperdome, Inc. >404-250-3242 http://www.iperdome.com Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Some Interesting Parallels
From the archives . . . At 1/12/99, 04:48 AM, Jay Fenello wrote: > >I believe that history can provide valuable lessons >as we try and understand the very confusing process >that we are currently involved in. > >In my previous posting, I described some interesting >parallels with the early American Republic. Here >they are again, this time with their similarities >described . . . > >The White Paper <==> Declaration of Independence > >Both of these documents started a process of changing >the existing authority structure to a new one, one that >was less centralized and more open than the one before >it. They both painted a future vision, a blueprint of >their future world. > >Notice that more than 11 *years* passed between the >signing of the Declaration of Independence, and the >signing of the U.S. Constitution. > >Supporting Orgs <==> State Governments > >Both of these stakeholder groups had to quickly establish >a way to govern their affairs in a hurry. They had to deal >with questions of control/funding/representation/etc. to >quickly form an appropriate governing body. They also had >to figure out how to relate to each other, as well as a >potentially superior organization. > >In the early years of the confederacy, the states were in >various states of formation/organization, and there was >much diversity in their respective founding documents. > >Over time, these states refined their structures, often >taking ideas from each other. Many of these concepts, >including those on representation and citizen rights, were >useful when the U.S. Constitution was drafted in 1787. > >ICANN By-Laws <==> Articles of Confederation > >Both of these documents were the first implementation of >the concepts described in their respective guiding documents, >the White Paper and the Declaration of Independence. > >While the states were busy getting their act together, it >soon became apparent that the Articles of Confederation >had some serious problems. This combination of events >ultimately lead to the creation of the U.S. Constitution. > >Mike Roberts <==> John Hanson > >Both were the first leaders of the first attempt >to implement the vision outlined in their respective >guiding documents. For perspective, there were six >leaders between John Hanson and George Washington. > >This reflection on history has given me some >valuable insights into our current situation. > >First, this is going to take a long time. It took our >founding fathers over 11 years -- and at the rate we are >going, it will likely take us the same (especially if we >continue to use the same face-to-face meeting process >that *they* used in the 1770's) > >Second, this is an iterative process. We are going to >make mistakes, many at first. Welcome diversity, and >learn from it. > >Third, realize that there are going to be power plays, >legal challenges, governmental intervention, and all >manner of other machinations. Expect it, and call >them as you see them. > >Finally, be happy. These are exciting times, no >matter how painful they seems right now! > >Respectfully, > >Jay Fenello >President, Iperdome, Inc. >404-943-0524 http://www.iperdome.com Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 678-585-9765 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] BOUNCE list@ifwp.org: Non-member submission from [Hans Klein ]
> > >Supporters of the Civil Society Internet Forum performed numerous > >activities at the Yokohama meeting of the ICANN Board of Directors, > >including:=20 > > > >* presented a petition with over one hundred signatures to the ICANN Board > >calling for the staff and board to work with the Civil Society Internet > >Forum (CSIF) to facilitate broad participation in ICANN processes and to > >include CSIF sessions in its future meeting programmes (see web page). > >* approved in principle the "Civil Society Statement on ICANN Elections," a > >four-page document listing principles and issues in the At Large elections > >(see web page.) > >* organized a series of meeting to educate and organize civil society > >organizations and individuals. > > > >CSIF Supporters > > > >STEERING COMMITTEE (organizational affiliation for information purposes= > > only)=20 > >-Myung Koo Kang (Korean Internet Forum) (Interim Chair)=20 > >-Wolfgang Kleinwaechter (ICANN Studienkreis, Germany)=20 > >-Kimberly Heitman (Electronic Frontiers Australia)=20 > >-Hans Klein (Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, USA)=20 > >-Karen Higgs (Association for Progressive Communications, Uruguay) > >-Pierre Ouedraogo (Institut francophone des nouvelles technologies de > >l'information et de la formation/INTIF, Burkina Faso)=20 > >(A more permanent committee will be elected at the next CSIF meeting at the > >Los Angeles ICANN meeting.) > > > >Additional signatories (organizational affiliation for information purposes > >only):=20 > > > >AFRICA=20 > > > > Pierre Dandjinou (United Nations Development Program, Benin)=20 > > Dorothy Okello (Women of Uganda Net (WOUGNET), Uganda)=20 > > Moussa Fall (Enda Tiers Monde, Senegal)=20 > > > >ASIA AND PACIFIC=20 > > > > Toshimaru Ogura (JCA-Net, Japan)=20 > > Tony Hill (Internet Society Australia)=20 > > Nobuo Sakiyama (Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility,= > > Japan)=20 > > Hae-joang Cho=20 > > Chat Garcia Ramilo (APC WNSP, Manila, Philippines)=20 > > > >EUROPE=20 > > > > Chris Bailey (Association for Progressive Communications, UK)=20 > > Veni Markovski (Internet Society Bulgaria)=20 > > Karen Banks (GreenNet, UK)=20 > > > >LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN=20 > > > > Roberto Roggiero, INTERCOM - Ecuanex, Ecuador=20 > > Dafne Sabanes Plou (APC WNSP Latin America/Argentina)=20 > > Felipe Alfonso Rinc=F3n Ospina, Colombia=20 > > > >NORTH AMERICA=20 > > > > Garret Sern (Educause)=20 > > Barbara Simons (former President, Association of Computing Machinery, > >USA)=20 > > Marc Rotenberg, (Electronic Privacy Information Center, USA)=20 > > Barry Steinhardt (American Civil Liberties Union, USA)=20 > > Chris Chiu (American Civil Liberties Union, USA)=20 > > Maureen James (Association for Progressive Communications, Canada)=20 > > > >A full list of signatories to the Yokohama Petition for "Civil Society > >Participation in ICANN" is available at the web site:=20 > > http://www.CivilSocietyInternetForum.org > > > > > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D End of Announcement =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > > > > > >-- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719 > >"The truth is always hard. The only truly punishable offense in >Washington is to tell the truth. You will get along in Washington >better by lying one way or the other. If you tell the truth you >are unlikely to be forgiven." >- Prof. Angelo Codevilla, The Washington Weekly, July 17 2000 > Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] Re: Complaint to Dept of Commerce on abuse of users by ICANN
At 03:42 PM 7/31/00, Kent Crispin wrote: >On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 01:53:05PM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote: >[...] > > Sure, a million users is nothing to sneeze at. I think part of the > > problem here is the notion that the decision to support 10,000 > > users wasn't ever made public - perhaps it was and I just missed > > it although that seems unlikely - but, I'm utterly convinced it > > that hard limit was made public people woild have freaked out > > and severely questioned and warned about such a small number. > >Nobody set a hard limit. More disinfo from Kent! (how's blackops for the DoD Kent? ;-). Here it is, in Vint's own words: At 12:43 PM 7/30/00, vinton g. cerf wrote: >Every possible effort was made to increase the rate at which >registrations could be processed and we've gone from about 1000 >a day to an artificially limited 5,000 per day (200 per hour) >simply because staff time to process is limited. Registrations >close July 31. Note the term "artificially limited"!!! That means that they have made a decision to *only* accept 200 registrations per hour, regardless of what their system can accommodate! > > At the end of the day, planning for 10,000 anf getting 143,000 > > gets you in trouble. Planning for a million and getting 143,000 > > doesn't. > >Sure it does. You've wasted money, lots of it. > > > As for the money, Becky Burr/NTIC/DoC has stated in open fora > > that if it came right down to it and ICANN couldn't afford > > to do what it was doing, DoC would not let it fail because > > of money. I have no reason to believe she was lying. > >Of course! It's so simple! ICANN can spend as much money as it wants >because the DOC will bail them out. Not widely reported, but true ... Markle had already agreed to provide additional funding if necessary!!! Next excuse? Jay. > > Alternatives are always an option. If people were asekd "do > > you want only the first 10,000 to be able to vote or > > do you mind if we ask you to send a self addresses stamped > > envelope or a doller or two if you're outside the US" my > > off the wall guess is people would pick the latter. > >Hindsight is wonderful. Planning with off the wall guesses is a >breeze. > >-- >Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be >[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] Re: Formal complaint of abuse of users by ICANN
e is currently overloaded. > >Please try again when the system is less busy." when I tried to sign > >up. > > > >Clearly the whole ICANN model is not appropriate for the needs > >of the Internet and its users. > > > >I did propose a different model, and a prototype to build this > >model to you before ICANN was given the U.S. Dept of Commerce > >contract. > > > >Clearly it was crucial that you explore other models and try > >to determine what was the best proposal for the problem the > >U.S. government was faced with, namely how to protect the vital > >functions of the Internet from vested interests and to make > >it possible for them to scale. > > > >It seems that the U.S. government wasn't even interested > >in trying to identify the problem that had to be solved, > >let alone in trying to determine how to solve it. > > > >I am formerly objecting to the whole process of the creation > >and development of ICANN by the U.S. Department of Commerce, > >and requesting that you find a way to have the proposal I > >provided the Department of Commerce implemented. > > > >My proposal provided a means to create meaningful online participation > >by users and for computer scientists supported by their governments > >to create an open process that would utilize the Internet and > >its interactive processes to create the cooperative form needed > >to safeguard the vital functions of the Internet's infrastructure. > >That is what is needed not an institutional entity to encourage > >the "vested interests" to fight over power and control over vital > >functions of the Internet. > > > >I am sending this to you as a formal complaint of not being > >allowed to register with ICANN and asking that you take the necessary > >means to stop the abuse of users and the Internet that ICANN > >represents. > > > >Sincerely > > > >Ronda Hauben > >244 West 72nd Street Apt 15D > >New York, N.Y. 10023 > >U.S.A. > >(212)787-9361 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >= >I moved to a new MCI WorldCom facility on Nov 11, 1999 > >MCI WorldCom >22001 Loudoun County Parkway >Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf >Ashburn, VA 20147 >Telephone (703) 886-1690 >FAX (703) 886-0047 > > >"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!" >INET 2001: Internet Global Summit >5-8 June 2001 >Sweden International Fairs >Stockholm, Sweden >http://www.isoc.org/inet2001 > Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] ICANN Election Irregularities
[sent to 300+ press and government contacts] Over the last couple of days, ICANN board members Vint Cerf, Esther Dyson, Mike Roberts, and Grew Crew were called to task for their attempted justifications for the ongoing membership registration irregularities for the upcoming elections of the At-Large directors. Specifically, ICANN has limited registrations from the world-wide Internet community to only 200 per hour, resulting in an outcry from Netizens who want to vote, but can't register. In response to the plethora of excuses from the ICANN board, knowledgeable participants like Ronda Hauben, Russ Smith, and Micheal Sondow have revealed the ongoing pattern employed by ICANN to disenfranchise the accountability and membership provisions of the White Paper. Anyone wishing details of these exchanges should respond to this email, or contact me at the number below. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] Re: Complaint to Dept of Commerce on abuse of users by ICANN
are sorry. The database is currently overloaded. > >Please try again when the system is less busy." when I tried to sign > >up. > > > >Clearly the whole ICANN model is not appropriate for the needs > >of the Internet and its users. > > > >I did propose a different model, and a prototype to build this > >model to you before ICANN was given the U.S. Dept of Commerce > >contract. > > > >Clearly it was crucial that you explore other models and try > >to determine what was the best proposal for the problem the > >U.S. government was faced with, namely how to protect the vital > >functions of the Internet from vested interests and to make > >it possible for them to scale. > > > >It seems that the U.S. government wasn't even interested > >in trying to identify the problem that had to be solved, > >let alone in trying to determine how to solve it. > > > >I am formerly objecting to the whole process of the creation > >and development of ICANN by the U.S. Department of Commerce, > >and requesting that you find a way to have the proposal I > >provided the Department of Commerce implemented. > > > >My proposal provided a means to create meaningful online participation > >by users and for computer scientists supported by their governments > >to create an open process that would utilize the Internet and > >its interactive processes to create the cooperative form needed > >to safeguard the vital functions of the Internet's infrastructure. > >That is what is needed not an institutional entity to encourage > >the "vested interests" to fight over power and control over vital > >functions of the Internet. > > > >I am sending this to you as a formal complaint of not being > >allowed to register with ICANN and asking that you take the necessary > >means to stop the abuse of users and the Internet that ICANN > >represents. > > > >Sincerely > > > >Ronda Hauben > >244 West 72nd Street Apt 15D > >New York, N.Y. 10023 > >U.S.A. > >(212)787-9361 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >= >I moved to a new MCI WorldCom facility on Nov 11, 1999 > >MCI WorldCom >22001 Loudoun County Parkway >Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf >Ashburn, VA 20147 >Telephone (703) 886-1690 >FAX (703) 886-0047 > > >"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!" >INET 2001: Internet Global Summit >5-8 June 2001 >Sweden International Fairs >Stockholm, Sweden >http://www.isoc.org/inet2001 Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
Re: [IFWP] Re: Formal complaint of abuse of users by ICANN
e is currently overloaded. > >Please try again when the system is less busy." when I tried to sign > >up. > > > >Clearly the whole ICANN model is not appropriate for the needs > >of the Internet and its users. > > > >I did propose a different model, and a prototype to build this > >model to you before ICANN was given the U.S. Dept of Commerce > >contract. > > > >Clearly it was crucial that you explore other models and try > >to determine what was the best proposal for the problem the > >U.S. government was faced with, namely how to protect the vital > >functions of the Internet from vested interests and to make > >it possible for them to scale. > > > >It seems that the U.S. government wasn't even interested > >in trying to identify the problem that had to be solved, > >let alone in trying to determine how to solve it. > > > >I am formerly objecting to the whole process of the creation > >and development of ICANN by the U.S. Department of Commerce, > >and requesting that you find a way to have the proposal I > >provided the Department of Commerce implemented. > > > >My proposal provided a means to create meaningful online participation > >by users and for computer scientists supported by their governments > >to create an open process that would utilize the Internet and > >its interactive processes to create the cooperative form needed > >to safeguard the vital functions of the Internet's infrastructure. > >That is what is needed not an institutional entity to encourage > >the "vested interests" to fight over power and control over vital > >functions of the Internet. > > > >I am sending this to you as a formal complaint of not being > >allowed to register with ICANN and asking that you take the necessary > >means to stop the abuse of users and the Internet that ICANN > >represents. > > > >Sincerely > > > >Ronda Hauben > >244 West 72nd Street Apt 15D > >New York, N.Y. 10023 > >U.S.A. > >(212)787-9361 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >= >I moved to a new MCI WorldCom facility on Nov 11, 1999 > >MCI WorldCom >22001 Loudoun County Parkway >Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf >Ashburn, VA 20147 >Telephone (703) 886-1690 >FAX (703) 886-0047 > > >"INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!" >INET 2001: Internet Global Summit >5-8 June 2001 >Sweden International Fairs >Stockholm, Sweden >http://www.isoc.org/inet2001 > Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: You are Turning Away Outside Members Who Attempt To Register
>vigor. Doing the first alone isn't good enough. Even doing the >first two isn't good enough. > >For you to succeed, you must succeed equally with all three >deliverables. > > What grade would you give yourself on the third deliverable? >If you reported to someone, and your were that someone, how >would you rate your performance? How would you rate the >performance of the ICANN staff? Was the selection of the >inadequate registration server and the failure to quickly >upgrade it the result of sinister design, mopery or other >causes. > >Does that even matter? Would you accept any excuses from an >employee in your own business if they screwed up a subscription >campaign like this registration process has been... and then >pretended that it didn't matter? > >Doing all three of the above items adequately is better than >doing the first one very well and the last two poorly. > >It may be that this job can be better handled by a politician >than by an entrepreneur. Maybe ICANN is a venture that needs to >be de-privatized. > >Curtis Sahakian >847/676-2774 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >-- > > > > > Believe me, we have considered this, and many other options as >well! The > > level of interest has simply taken us by surprise. The problem >is that a > > delay would then be "unfair" to those who tried and didn't >know about the > > extended deadline, and so forth and so on. Meanwhile, that >would mean > > delaying the rest of the process, because we also need time >for people to > > get their PINs, and then for them to support independent >candidates for the > > board. So in the end we decided to keep the schedule as >is. The > > deadline, like most deadlines, is arbitrary anyway, and it >makes more sense > > to keep it as is because changing it would cause other >disruptions. > > > > Esther > > > > At 12:30 PM 7/28/00 -0400, Mikki Barry wrote: > > >Esther - > > > > > >Given the overload with the server and the other technical >issues, > > >wouldn't it be prudent to extend the deadline for voter >registration > > >to give another chance to those who have been unable to >access it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes! > > chairman, EDventure Holdings > > chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 1 (212) 924-8800-- 1 (212) 924-0240 fax > > 104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor) > > New York, NY 10011 USA > > http://www.edventure.com >http://www.icann.org > > > > PC Forum: 25 to 28 March 2001, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona > > Book: "Release 2.1: A design for living in the digital age" > > High-Tech Forum in Europe: November 1 to 3 - Barcelona Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] PFIR Statement on Internet Policies
Hi Lauren, At 05:21 PM 7/26/00, Lauren Weinstein wrote: >Jay, (feel free to forward this if you wish) > >We can certainly learn from the past, but we of course can't change it. >What's done is done, and we can but look to the future. In the PRIVACY >realm where I've spent much of my time, I've frequently run up against people >who ignore concerns about privacy and security problems that have been >brought up, simply because they've considered them to be mere speculation. >Now that many of those problems have actually appeared, we're suddenly >seeing more attention being paid to these issues--suddenly they're >convinced, and some things are (slowly) changing at various levels. I agree that this is likely to be true, at least at some level less than 100%. Would you agree that Corporatism and the capture of our political process is also likely to be true, at least at some level? If so, it is important that you acknowledge this as one of the many problems we must consider moving forward. If not, you end up discounting one of the main reasons that so many egregious decisions have been made resulting in ICANN, and you make it that much easier for these forces to take over the process again in the future. >Similarly, it seems that many of the concerns you cite will carry more >weight this time around, because the current situation has shown that many >predicted negative outcomes *did* actually occur. A lot more people are >convinced now that it was not done properly the last time. We've been down this path several times before. Each new batch of participants believe that this time, the process will be different, fair, and consistent with our collective mythology about the way our political process works. Truth is, our political process is broken. Two years from now, you will be one of us, repeating these words to the next batch of newcomers :-( >I do not accept >that the game is "fixed" in the manner you suggest, at least not to the >extent that it necessarily has to play out the same way this time around. >It's much more obvious what can go wrong now. "Fixed" was not a good word. I should have said broken. How can we expect a broken political system to establish a new political system that isn't as flawed as the original? >Your input *is* much appreciated, and I hope you'll participate in the >ongoing discussions in all manner of venues. We will obviously not always >agree, but that's an important part of what discussion is all about... Agreed -- and thanks again for entering into this dialog. I share your appreciation for this process, as it goes a long way toward building bridges between the islands of communities that exist on the Internet. >--Lauren-- Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] PFIR Statement on Internet Policies
Hi Lauren, Thank you for your comments. If you'd be so kind, we have a few more questions for you. At 11:56 AM 7/25/00, Lauren Weinstein wrote: > > > PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control > > > > > > It is our belief that the current mechanism for making many key > decisions in > > > this regard, as embodied in The Internet Corporation for Assigned > Names and > > > Numbers, "ICANN" (http://www.icann.org), is proving to be inadequate > to the > > > task at hand. We believe that this is the result primarily of structural > > > and historical factors, not the fault of the individuals directing > ICANN's > > > activities, whom we feel have been genuinely attempting to do the best > > > possible job that they could with highly complex, contentious, and > thankless > > > tasks. > > > > Do you really believe that the current ICANN > > board has managed their affairs in an ethical > > and moral way (some measures of which include > > truthfulness and honesty)? > > > > If so, then there are many who would like to > > understand your beliefs, especially given the > > historical record as *not* documented in the > > GAO Report. > > > > If not, then by implication are we to assume > > that you support compromises in ethics and > > morals under some extreme circumstances, > > such as those facing the ICANN board? > > > > These are not trick questions, only an attempt > > to get to the common essence of the problems > > surrounding ICANN. > >Greetings. Peter and I recognize that emotions run very high on these >issues in many quarters. There are a wide range of opinions about any >aspect of ICANN anyone cares to name. Everyone is of course free to draw >their own conclusions about the actions of the board as a whole, and >there's plenty of varied opinions on that as well. > >We feel that it would be most productive to not dwell on the emotional >aspects of the situation but rather to concentrate on the basic questions: "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana While it is easy to discount the past due to the emotions it evokes, it is not possible to solve the current problems that are ICANN without understanding how we got here. Did you know that ICANN is at least the third attempt to deal with these issues? Did you know that, in the previous attempts, the process was hijacked just like it has been with ICANN? Did you know that ICANN is founded on the same model as the WTO? http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is99/governance/fenello.html#wto Did you know that the same political process that brought us ICANN, brought us the Telecom Act of 1996 (see McChesney)? Did you know that this Act allowed corporations to *vastly* increase and consolidate ownership over *all* media outlets (see Cronkite)? Did you know that the WTO and ICANN have been heavily supported by the corporate media (see FAIR and MRC)? Without understanding this history, and the forces that are driving these *very* bad decisions, how can we expect the next iteration to turn out any different? >1) Is ICANN making good decisions and doing a good job? > >2) If the answer to (1) is no, what's a proposed next step for consideration? > >We think we've made it pretty clear that we consider the answer to (1) to >basically be no--we don't think ICANN is overall doing a good job, and in >fact we feel that the situation is getting worse rather than better. We've >also explained in some detail what we're suggesting for (2). That's where >we feel we need to put our efforts to contribute the most towards solving >these problems. While many agree that ICANN is bad situation that is getting worse, your proposed solution scares the pants off of most of us who have been in the trenches. Consider what *could* happen under your proposal. We could end up with a legitimate governance body, duly authorized by the governments of the world, captured by the same forces that have captured ICANN. >We'll let others, if they wish, dissect the ICANN board's motivations and >the history in more detail if they consider that course to be productive >from their standpoint. Before you attempt to save us from ICANN, perhaps you would consider engaging in a dialog with the so-called rabble. (To subscribe to AWPD, send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) We are not crazies, and we are not un-reasonable. We are just angry about the continued arrogance of our "elders" who keep screwing things up for the rest of us. Jay. >--Lauren-- >Lauren Weinstein >[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTE
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] PFIR Statement on Internet Policies
[forwarded with permission] Hi Lauren, At 01:57 PM 7/26/00, Lauren Weinstein wrote: >Hi. With the blocked redistributions for non-list members for some >of those lists, I've only replied to you. > >As you can imagine, I'm rather inundated with e-mail right now >(more than the usual mountain) and my ability to whip up suitably >detailed replies in short order is very limited at the moment, so >please excuse any lack of quick responses. > >But I think the key point is that there are all sorts of models possible as >to how to try make things better, but unless some positive steps are taken >soon the "default" evolution is likely to lead us to a very bad place, with >the forces that now wield most of the power over the Internet becoming ever >more firmly entrenched, and the currently disenfranchised groups staying >that way, permanently. Agreed! [It's not your motives I question, just your approach :-] >Are there risks in change? Yes, but we should and can learn from history. >One of the advantages of a new organization, at this stage of the game, is >that it would be possible to write into its bylaws, from day one, >protections to try avoid the sorts of pitfalls that history has shown us. Did you know that ICANN's current "pitfalls" were predicted, and that many of us mobilized to "fix" the by-laws before they were adopted? For example, did you know that there were multiple proposals for the so-called "Newco," and that some of these proposals were written solely to get the kind of by-law provisions that you now seek added to ICANN's by-laws? Did you know that several of us on these lists were involved in multiple conference calls between Commerce and the initial ICANN board, to make the very changes that you now seek? In other words, what makes you think that this time, it will be different? The game is fixed, and until we acknowledge that fact, we will get more of the same. >This is of course no guarantee of success, nor of different pitfalls, nor of >new negative factors that we can't even imagine at this point--but that lack >of guarantees is in the nature of everything we do in this life. > >In the end, domestic governments will (and should) make the decisions >about what they're going to do (or allow) in these areas. It's >worthwhile however, to try ensure that they're working with balanced >information and input from the broadest possible spectrum of >individuals, groups, and interests, and that's a major part of >what this proposed organization would be trying to achieve. How balanced can your information be, when you have not engaged in a dialog with the "disenfranchised" early participants? How much support can you expect when you put forward proposals that are insensitive to their concerns? If your goal is to replace ICANN with something better, then shouldn't we be working together as allies? Jay. >--Lauren-- Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: [awpd] PFIR Statement on Internet Policies
Hello Lauren and Peter. I posted your PFIR statement to the Aligning with Purpose discussion list, and ended up with some questions that we were hoping you could answer for the list. Thanks in advance for your thoughtful replies. Jay. At 09:24 PM 7/24/00, Michael Sondow wrote: >Jay Fenello wrote: > > > >PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and > Control > > > > > It is our belief that the current mechanism for making many key > decisions in > > this regard, as embodied in The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and > > Numbers, "ICANN" (http://www.icann.org), is proving to be inadequate to the > > task at hand. We believe that this is the result primarily of structural > > and historical factors, not the fault of the individuals directing ICANN's > > activities, whom we feel have been genuinely attempting to do the best > > possible job that they could with highly complex, contentious, and > thankless > > tasks. > >Are these people joking, or are they just hopelessly uninformed? Maybe another way to state this question... Do you really believe that the current ICANN board has managed their affairs in an ethical and moral way (some measures of which include truthfulness and honesty)? If so, then there are many who would like to understand your beliefs, especially given the historical record as *not* documented in the GAO Report. If not, then by implication are we to assume that you support compromises in ethics and morals under some extreme circumstances, such as those facing the ICANN board? These are not trick questions, only an attempt to get to the common essence of the problems surrounding ICANN. Thanks again, Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml -- David Korten
RE: [IFWP] Re: Very Different Stories
At 03:02 PM 7/15/00, Gomes, Chuck wrote: >Jay, > >Please explain what glitch there was in the SRS. I don't believe your >assessment in this regard is correct. > >Chuck Hi Chuck, I was referring to an exchange that occurred on one of the IETF mailing lists, where at least one member of the SRS advisory committee was complaining about some design decisions that were made about the SRS that were less than optimal. If you'd like more details, then I'd suggest removing them from their NDA, as they have requested. Jay. > > -----Original Message- > > From: Jay Fenello [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 2:10 AM > > To: Becky Burr; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Esther Dyson; > > Mike Roberts; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [IFWP] Re: Very Different Stories > > > > > > > > FYI: > > > > > > At 11:54 PM 7/13/00, [someone] wrote: > > >Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,16642,00.html?nl=dnh > > > >http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/151796.html > > > > > >Neither of these articles goes into detail on the pros or cons of > > >ICANN's DNS management or plans. Do you have any URLS to something > > >more substantive? > > > > > > Yes, please see Mikki Barry's Congressional > > testimony below. > > > > > > >Most of us domain owners see ICANN as a breath of fresh air after 5 years > > >of monopolistic management, price gouging, anti-consumer privacy > > policies, > > >insecure data management, and direct email advertising (spam) by > > >NSI/NetSol. > > > > > > Well, others wonder why you would feel that way. > > > > Ironically and if anything, your domain name is > > much less secure today than it was before ICANN > > started messing with it. > > > > For example, we have just endured a wave of domain > > name hijackings (i.e. Internet.com), and lost names > > due to transfer glitches in the SRS (i.e. races.com). > > > > We have a registrar community that has discovered > > "partnerships" with domain name brokers and auction > > houses, and the last time I checked, every single > > registrar had a clause that allowed them to > > confiscate your domain name without recourse. > > > > Truth of the matter is, ICANN has made egregious > > decisions in support of its agenda, resulting in > > an organization heavily biased against small > > businesses and individuals. > > > > Just look at the terms of the UDRP. It heavily > > favours the plaintiff, to the point of allowing > > them to choose their jury, and only giving the > > defendants a very short time to retain counsel > > and respond. > > > > Or look at the bias in the DNSO, where famous > > mark owners have pushed through a "Sunrise > > Provision," whereby they get to preclude up to > > 50 derivations of their mark in any new gTLD! > > > > What we are really seeing is an attempt to > > control words on a world-wide basis, just as > > we are seeing attempts to own genetic code, > > business processes, etc. But these are very > > complicated times, as highlighted by the ever > > present questions that surround Napster. > > > > While I don't have any answers, I do have many > > questions -- and a belief that we must have open > > and frank discussions about these issues if we > > are to find any kind of lasting solution. > > > > Hope this helps, > > > > Jay. > > > > > > >Until someone presents a reason to question their management, other > > >than the fact that we're all waiting for more top level domains, I say > > >thank goodness for ICANN. > > > > > >[sig file] > > > > > > From the Congressional Record: > > > > http://com-notes.house.gov/cchear/hearings106.nsf/0ecf8a0be39f34228525671b > > 0073d116/42eb7dbc7f008088852568a90072b057?OpenDocument > > > > > > TESTIMONY OF MICHAELA M. BARRY > > > > Ms. Barry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. > > I have to admit here that I am an attorney. Please make no > > mistake about ICANN's role. It goes far beyond that of > > technical management and enters into the realm of the > > regulatory body. It is not just about plumbing, but it is also > > about the codes and the l
[IFWP] Re: GAO Whitewashes ICANN Investigation!
At 11:20 PM 7/8/00, Pete Farmer wrote: >--- Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > GAO Whitewashes ICANN Investigation! > > > > www.gao.gov/new.items/og00033r.pdf > > > > More comments to follow . . . > > >The GAO's investigation was aimed at the following: > >1) Was the formation of ICANN in accordance with the Administrative >Procedure Act and the Government Corporation Control Act? > >Conclusion: These acts are inapplicable to ICANN's formation. In other >words, the Department of Commerce did not violate legal procedures in >issuing the White Paper. > >2) How was ICANN's Interim Board selected and what role did the Department >of Commerce play in its selection? > >Conclusion: The ICANN Interim Board was selected primarily by one >individual (Jon Postel) and not the Department of Commerce. Hi Pete, I've claimed that the GAO has "whitewashed" it's investigation into ICANN. As one example, I described in detail to the GAO investigators how Esther Dyson revealed in public comments, that she was first approached for her board appointment by Ira Magaziner and Roger Cochetti at the Aspen Institute meeting, summer of 1998. This was well before ICANN was even formed, while the rest of the Internet community was doing the "round-the-world tour" (aka the IFWP meetings - www.ifwp.org) as orchestrated by Commerce. Where is this revealed in the GAO report? And this is only one example. There are many more improprieties that have been elided from the GAO report. Just consider the history of the Witness list: Mikki Barry provided comprehensive evidence of the gaming involved in the formation of ICANN, as per her Congressional testimony: http://www.domain-name.org/testimony722.html Michael Fromkin and David Post host the ICANN Watch website (www.icannwatch.org), where they have documented many other egregious actions of the ICANN board. Karl Aurbach has spent many hours documenting similar excesses by ICANN on the public lists, and Ronda Hauben has even written about her complaints: http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/8369/1.html She has also conducted a radio interview, to be aired and published soon: www.fair.org I could go on, but you get the picture. >3) Did the Department of Commerce have the legal authority to enter into >agreements with ICANN and to participate in certain ICANN activities? > >Conclusion: Yes, the Department had such authority. > >4) Did DoC have a legal basis to expend funds to participate in ICANN's >proceedings and activities? > >Conclusion: Yes, it did have a legal basis. > >5) Does ICANN, as a "project partner," have authority under Office of >Management and Budget Circular A-25 to impose user fees to cover ICANN's >operating costs? > >Conclusion: OMB Circular A-25 does not apply to ICANN. > >6) Does the DoC have legal authority to transfer control of the >authoritative root server? > >Conclusion: The answer is not clear, but it's a moot point for now because >the Department has no current plans to effect such a transfer. > > >I take it from Jay's outcry of "whitewash" that he disputes the >conclusions. I am sure we all look forward to his reasoned analysis, built >upon a solid foundation in administrative law. Well, let me put it this way . . . If the excesses and egregious actions of Commerce and the ICANN board are not illegal, then our system is more broken than I thought :-( Jay. >Pete >__ >Peter J. Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Director, Optical Networking >Strategies Unlimited >Mountain View, CA Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: [Nc-tlds] PETITION: Civil Society Forum
At 09:16 AM 7/15/00, Michael Sondow wrote: >Craig A. Johnson (CPSR) wrote (to CPTech): > > > > Jamie, > > > > Hans sent this last night (Japan time). Can you post to your list? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Craig > > > > > > > > PETITION > > CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN ICANN Excerpts from: Civilizing Society by David C. Korten The FEASTA annual lecture. Dublin, Ireland - July 4, 2000 The citizen protests in Seattle the end of last year brought the World Trade Organization meeting to a stand still and focused world attention on an increasingly visible tension between two extraordinarily powerful social forces. One is the force of corporate globalization driven by a once seemingly invincible alliance between the world's largest mega-corporations and most powerful governments. In the eyes of its proponents the integration of national economies into a seamless global economy is spurring economic growth through the expansion of trade to bring material prosperity to all the world, spread democracy, and create the financial resources and new technologies needed to protect the global environment. But most of all it is making many of these proponents very rich and powerful, which may have something to do with their enthusiasm. The second force is the global democracy movement being advanced by a planetary citizen alliance known as global civil society. Before Seattle '99 this force found expression in the national democracy movements that played a critical role in the breakup of the Soviet empire and the fall of apartheid in South Africa -- and in other great progressive social movements of our time, such as the civil rights, environmental, peace, and women's movements. The corporate force is centrally planned by a well-organized and well-funded corporate elite and PR rhetoric not withstanding, the driving motive is a competitive drive for profits. The citizen force depends largely on voluntary energy, is self-organizing, and is grounded in a deep value commitment to democracy, community, equity, and the web of planetary life. Although it has no identifiable organizational or institutional form, it is taking on a striking sense of coherence and acquiring the power to at least make the corporate elites very nervous. Its impetus comes from the awakening of millions of people of every nationality, race, and religious affiliation to the contradictions of corporate globalization, which contrary to its claims is enriching the few at the expense of the many, replacing democracy with an elitist and authoritarian corporate rule, destroying the environment, and eroding the relationships of trust and caring that are the essential foundation of a civilized society -- all in the mindless pursuit of money to further enrich those who already have more money than they could possibly use. Read the rest at: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/korten/korten_feasta.shtml Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World --- "We are witness to the emergence of an epic struggle between corporate globalization and popular democracy." -- David Korten
[IFWP] Re: Very Different Stories
FYI: At 11:54 PM 7/13/00, [someone] wrote: >Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,16642,00.html?nl=dnh > >http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/151796.html > >Neither of these articles goes into detail on the pros or cons of >ICANN's DNS management or plans. Do you have any URLS to something >more substantive? Yes, please see Mikki Barry's Congressional testimony below. >Most of us domain owners see ICANN as a breath of fresh air after 5 years >of monopolistic management, price gouging, anti-consumer privacy policies, >insecure data management, and direct email advertising (spam) by >NSI/NetSol. Well, others wonder why you would feel that way. Ironically and if anything, your domain name is much less secure today than it was before ICANN started messing with it. For example, we have just endured a wave of domain name hijackings (i.e. Internet.com), and lost names due to transfer glitches in the SRS (i.e. races.com). We have a registrar community that has discovered "partnerships" with domain name brokers and auction houses, and the last time I checked, every single registrar had a clause that allowed them to confiscate your domain name without recourse. Truth of the matter is, ICANN has made egregious decisions in support of its agenda, resulting in an organization heavily biased against small businesses and individuals. Just look at the terms of the UDRP. It heavily favours the plaintiff, to the point of allowing them to choose their jury, and only giving the defendants a very short time to retain counsel and respond. Or look at the bias in the DNSO, where famous mark owners have pushed through a "Sunrise Provision," whereby they get to preclude up to 50 derivations of their mark in any new gTLD! What we are really seeing is an attempt to control words on a world-wide basis, just as we are seeing attempts to own genetic code, business processes, etc. But these are very complicated times, as highlighted by the ever present questions that surround Napster. While I don't have any answers, I do have many questions -- and a belief that we must have open and frank discussions about these issues if we are to find any kind of lasting solution. Hope this helps, Jay. >Until someone presents a reason to question their management, other >than the fact that we're all waiting for more top level domains, I say >thank goodness for ICANN. > >[sig file] From the Congressional Record: http://com-notes.house.gov/cchear/hearings106.nsf/0ecf8a0be39f34228525671b0073d116/42eb7dbc7f008088852568a90072b057?OpenDocument TESTIMONY OF MICHAELA M. BARRY Ms. Barry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to admit here that I am an attorney. Please make no mistake about ICANN's role. It goes far beyond that of technical management and enters into the realm of the regulatory body. It is not just about plumbing, but it is also about the codes and the licensing for that plumbing. ICANN's policy will affect commerce, freedom of expression, and likely stifle the very medium it seeks to regulate. We spent years fighting communism and its vision of planned economies. Let us not let that vision happen to the Internet. Competition is paramount, but not at the cost of free expression, sacrificing small business, and individual interests, and without accountability. ICANN is now trying to execute a policy agenda before it has created the participatory structures that would allow its decisions to be accepted and trusted by a broad spectrum of stakeholders. ICANN does not now, nor has it ever had legitimacy by consensus of the Internet community. ICANN is the classic top-down organizational structure without accountability. Most of the ordinary participant's in ICANN's activities thought that they were participating in an institution-building process. They thought that ICANN was a level playing field where all competing groups could come together to work out a consensus approach. They thought that they would have an opportunity to create membership structures, representational mechanisms, and policy development procedures first, and that actual policymaking would happen second. These include imposition of dispute policies from the World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO, which even the U.S. Small Business Administration says are discriminatory. Please read the rest!! Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Two Very Different Stories
Today, the General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress, released its long awaited report on its investigation into the formation of ICANN, the World's new Internet Governance body. What follows are two very different stories on the conclusions of that report. One article boldly declares that ICANN's legitimacy issues are now, at long last, finally resolved: http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,16642,00.html?nl=dnh The other describes how "Opponents of the powerful and controversial ICANN today blasted a government report that found nothing illegal in the formation or the ongoing governance efforts of the fledgling entity." http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/151796.html It also quoted a GAO official who tried to justify the report, because it "deals only with legal issues surrounding ICANN's development, not with whether that development was a good idea." Over the coming days, I'll have much more to say about these discrepancies. I'll also address the GAO's assertion that "Many of [ICANN's critics] had basic complaints about how (ICANN was formed) but when we asked them 'was there a violation of federal law that occurred here?' they didn't have an opinion" Until next time . . . Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] GAO Whitewashes ICANN Investigation!
GAO Whitewashes ICANN Investigation! www.gao.gov/new.items/og00033r.pdf More comments to follow . . . Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] ACLU/EPIC ICANN Democracy Project
FYI: >Warning of Thorny Online Issues Ahead, Cyber-Rights Groups Form Internet >Democracy Project > >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Amy Weil, ACLU, (212) 549-2561 or 2666 >Andrew Shen, EPIC, (202) 483-1140 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thursday, July 6, 2000 > >NEW YORK -- Seeking to strengthen civil society online, the American Civil >Liberties Union (ACLU), Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility >(CPSR) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) joined >together today to launch the Internet Democracy Project. > >"The goals of the Internet Democracy Project are to encourage >participation by non-governmental organizations in Internet governance and >to promote the principles of a civil society," said Hans Klein Chair of >CPSR. > >As the unique medium of the Internet develops, Klein noted, key governance >decisions about central resources and operations are being made by >quasi-governmental agencies, such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned >Names and Numbers, known as ICANN. > >ICANN is a new global organization originally chartered by the United >States Government to administer the Internet addresses and the Domain Name >System which govern what a Internet site can be called and how it can be >found. > >"There is real need to focus the attention of civil society on the >seemingly technical issues that organizations like ICANN are addressing," >said Barry Steinhardt Associate Director of the ACLU. "If our voices are >not heard while the governance structures are being created it may be too >late," he added. Increasingly, ICANN has been setting policies on issues >that will have a significant impact on the free expression and privacy >rights of Internet users for example by crafting policies that favor >commercial interests over those of non-commercial speakers. > >As one of its first priorities, the Project will sponsor a forum on "Civil >Society and the ICANN Elections" on July 13 in Yokohama, Japan. Yokohama >is the site of the next ICANN board meeting and related meetings. The >forum will feature speakers from around the globe and will include >discussion of principles by which the Internet should be governed. In >addition to its work on ICANN, the Internet Democracy Project will also >look at the impact of other Internet governance structure on civil society. > >"ICANN may be the most prominent organization in some corners of the >globe, but it is hardly the only group that will affect the future of the >Internet," said Marc Rotenberg, Executive Director of EPIC. "Our work will >be broader and we will encourage the participation of the Public Voice at >every opportunity," continued Rotenberg. > >The Project's upcoming agenda will include: > ># Statement of Principles -- Developing support for a statement on "Civil >Society and ICANN Elections," which is to be discussed in Yokohama. The >Internet Democracy Project will continue to seek support for the statement >that speaks to the need for transparent and representative governance, a >balanced approach for intellectual property protection, the need to ensure >minimal and equitable costs for domain registration, and other key issues >for the management of ICANN. > ># Informational Clearinghouse -- The Internet Democracy Project will >promote public education about Internet governance and encourage public >participation in Internet policymaking. IDP will publish a newsletter, >establish a web site (www.internetdemocracy.net), and produce a sourcebook >on Internet governance issues. > ># ICANN Election Resource -- The Project will serve as a non-partisan >educational resource for voters in the upcoming election of At Large >members of the Board of the ICANN. The Project will also foster dialogue >among voters and ICANN's current and potential Board members about >important public policy issues. The Project will ask the candidates to >express their position on civil society issues and widely publish their >answers. > >The Internet Democracy Project is non-partisan and will neither support >nor oppose the election of any candidates. > >The Internet Democracy Project is online at >www.internetdemocracyproject.org. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Vote on WTO Withdrawal!
FYI: June 20, 2000 Vote on WTO Withdrawal! A House vote on H. J. Res 90, a bill "Withdrawing the approval of the United States from the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization," is scheduled for Wednesday, June 21st. H. J. Res. 90 is a critically important piece of legislation, since it would get the United States completely out of the World Trade Organization and repeal the 1994 legislation implementing the agreement. When asked about the importance of getting out of the WTO in an interview in The New American magazine, Representative Jack Metcalf (R-WA), a co-sponsor of H. J. Res 90, said: My thinking on this matter can be summed up in one word, sovereignty. Our nation's sovereignty is at stake. I want negotiations between our nation and any other nation, even China, to be conducted on a one-to-one basis. Not arranged by groups and organizations which, once you join them, you've already committed to do everything that has already been agreed to. This is the only way we can protect the people of the United States. There are a lot of very powerful forces out there that would like to do things their way and not allow our nation to act in its own interests. The World Trade Organization is one of them. Let's be brutally frank: There is not currently much support for this resolution. It has only 9 cosponsors. The House Ways and Means Committee voted 35-0 to report the bill adversely (that is, recommend the rejection of) to the entire House. Only a wave of communications from constituents will convince Congress to pass H. J. Res. 90. It is too late to write. You must call, fax, or e-mail your support of this bill to your Congressman IMMEDIATELY. Tell your Congressman that the WTO not only undermines U.S. sovereignty - it is also economically harmful to Americans because it benefits the multinational corporations at the expense of American workers. The recent vote by the House to grant permanent Normal Trade Relations to China paves the way for the admission of China to the WTO. This will further undermine the competitiveness of U.S.-made goods on the world market. Don't delay! Contact your Congressman now! Congressional Contact Info: http://www.jbs.org/congress/cgcontact.htm Resources: 1. Interview of Rep. Ron Paul on H.J.Res. 90 in upcoming April 24, 2000 issue of The New American: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2000/04-24-2000/vo16no09_wto.htm 2. "Trading Away Our Sovereignty" by Thomas R. Eddlem: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1994/vo10no05.htm 3. For a complete analysis of the WTO please go to: http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/trade/index.htm ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
Re: [IFWP] That register.com commercial
That only applies to the rabble ;-) Jay. At 01:33 PM 6/19/00, Ellen Rony wrote: >The Registrar Accreditation Agreement implies a prohibition against >warehousing of domain names: > >http://www.icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-12may99.htm > > >9. Registrar shall abide by any ICANN-adopted policy prohibiting or >restricting warehousing of or\ speculation in domain names by registrars. > > > >>I'm curious about something. Many of you have probably seen the > >>register.com commericals, where they have people touting the domains > >>they've registered (e.g., sisterearth.com, hydrowatts.com, thefabers.com). > >>Checking the whois database, of course, reveals all these domains are > >>actually owned by register.com. > >> > >>Particularly in the case of thefabers.com, what recourse would a family > >>with the last name of Faber have against this blatant squatting? > >>These domains that register.com are using are not tied to or > >>representative of any 'product or service', except that they are > >>domain names, and register.com sells domain names. > >> > >>Would someone have a case to take these domains away from register.com > >>under the UDRP? What are the implications should the arbiters decide > >>that register.com deserves to keep these names? > >Mikki Barry wrote: > > > > >Of course not. Register.com is a large company. Therefore, they > >will win under the UDRP. Don't you yet understand how this works? > > >-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- >Ellen Rony// http://www.domainhandbook.com >Co-author *=" / [EMAIL PROTECTED] >The Domain Name Handbook \ ) +1 415.435.5010 > // \\ "Carpe canine" > > The more people I meet, the more I like my dog. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Ralph Nader on Internet Giveaway
FYI: Original Message Subject: Giveaways to Corporations- by Ralph Nader Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:44:30 -0400 From: enrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GIVEAWAYS The U.S. federal government is quite probably the richest property owner on earth. The government owns vast tracts of land, including oil and mineral riches, forests, thousands of buildings and plants, the public airwaves and much more. Because they often do not appear as budgetary debit items, government giveaways too frequently escape the corporate welfare stigma. Giveaways are in fact one of the purest forms of corporate welfare -- a something-for-nothing, or something-for-too-little, proposition. The level of public outrage would be high if the government wrote a $70 billion check to the broadcast industry -- but that is effectively what happened when the Federal Communications Commission, pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, handed over the digital television spectrum to existing broadcasters. The government retains its property as the shared commonwealth of the people of the United States, and there should be a strong presumption against giving it away. Where a reasoned decision is made to distribute some of that wealth to private parties, the government should explore whether it can distribute the public assets in a non-exclusive, public-purpose way, or in a fashion that promotes competition. When public assets are going to be distributed to private parties, there should be a strong presumption that the government should receive a market-rate purchase or lease price; and where taxpayer assets are to be distributed to a narrow class of beneficiaries, below-market purchase or rental rates should be accepted only in the most compelling of circumstances. Finally, prior to transfer or government property to private parties, the government should consider whether there are non-monetary reciprocal obligations that should be demanded of recipients -- these may include everything ranging from binding promises to adhere to higher environmental standards to contributing equipment to support noncommercial television. With stealth government giveaways of public assets, such as the internet naming rights discussed below, accelerating, there is an urgent need for the adoption of procedural and substantive protections to prevent the looting of the commonwealth. Original Message Subject: Internet Giveaways--by Ralph Nader Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:54:55 -0400 From: enrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Internet Giveaways An evolving giveaway of public assets involves the management of the U.S. government's internet assets. The federal government currently contracts with Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI), to manage certain domain name registrations. After entering into the contract in 1993, NSI was later acquired by SAIC for $3.9 million, and subsequently was permitted to charge U.S. consumers wildly excessive fees for registering internet domain names. NSI's monopoly on the .com and other valuable domain names has turned a tiny initial investment into a firm with a market capitalization of $2.5 billion -- thanks to control of the power to sell the public the right to use their own domain names. At no time did the government seek any competitive bids to determine the prices that consumers and business should pay for domain name registrations. As public resentment over the high prices and poor service have grown, the government is now trying to find ways to introduce competition. But NSI is using its monopoly profits to lobby the Congress and the executive branch to maintain its monopoly. As the Administration seeks to replace the current NSI monopoly with something new, it is using its earlier mistakes as a rationale for a new government giveaway that could create an entirely new set of governance problems for the public. Currently the Administration is negotiating a transfer of the "A DNS root server" to ICANN, a private non-profit organization. The new non-profit organization seeks the authority to impose fees on all internet domain names, to set international policy on trademarks and other issues, and to launch an undefined set of policy initiatives that it will fund from fees assessed on domain registrations. This new initiative raises a number of questions regarding its lack of accountability, and it is justified largely on the basis that the NSI monopoly needs to be "fixed." But it is hard to see how the creation of a new unaccountable body constitutes a "fix." ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "Where the people fear the government there is tyranny; where the government fears the people there is liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson
[IFWP] Nader on Corporate Control
s." Nader quoted Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis who declared for the ages, "We can have a democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both." Nader said that his campaign will highlight active and productive citizens who practice democracy. The Nader 2000 campaign will seek the engagement of a million people who pledge to raise a hundred hours and a hundred dollars to overcome ballot barriers, to get the vote out, and to remove the power inequalities that loom over us. "Widespread reform will not flourish without a fairer distribution of power for the key roles of voter, citizen, worker, taxpayer and consumer." In a recent Zogby poll of 842 likely voters nationwide, Ralph Nader came in third with 5.7 percent of the vote among likely voters, outdistancing Pat Buchanan who polled 3.6 percent. The poll showing Nader as the leading third-party candidate was conducted April 1-7, just seven weeks after Nader announced his candidacy. Nader is on the ballot in 15 states, and is collecting signatures for ballot access in all other states. Volunteers are helping to collect 13,000 signatures in West Virginia to give the citizens of West Virginia the chance to choose Nader in November. For more information see votenader.org. ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] GAO Report in 30 Days
With thirty days to go, the New York Times remains one of the *only* major media outlets to report on the Congressional investigation into the establishment of ICANN (minimal as it was)! At 12:19 PM 5/2/00, Jay Fenello wrote: >The New York Times Scoops the Rest (again)! >http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/cyber/capital/02capital.html Shouldn't really be a surprise, I guess . . . http://216.173.206.96/imc/display.php3?article_id=151 News Blackout Creates Chaos by dan merkle 6:32pm Tue Nov 30 '99 The failure of the U.S. mainstream press to cover the substantive concerns regarding the WTO has caused a huge backlog of anger and frustration that has now been released. Scholars, scientists and activists from around the world have been voicing concerns over the WTO policies without an voice in the U.S. press. U.S. politicians, mainstream press and business leaders will privately wonder why 50,000 people descended on Seattle to voice their concerns over the policies of the WTO. They will also wonder why there was so much anger. Yet, the outward spin will be clear and direct: these activists do not understand the issues and do not offer another vision superior to that mandated by the corporate interests. The question as to what triggered the most powerful riot in the U.S. in the last 30 years is any easy one for scholars, scientists, intellectuals and activists around the world: the failure of these very same politicians, press and business leaders to seriously address their concerns. Like a precocious teenager, those who have been voicing concerns against U.S. corporate policies have been ridiculed, ignored and jailed. For some, their countries have been invaded and destroyed. The biggest fear of this extremely small, but powerful, number of people, is that the truth will be exposed. Like South Africa, Russia and the British Empire, the use of manipulation and force is a temporary mechanism to control the social dynamics to maintain the status quo. Many in the U.S. who have not directly been subject to the abuse of power by this government and the corporate interests will have a hard time understanding this level of wrath. Yet, as the story unfolds and the crimes of history are put in their proper perspective, we will look back to the last 20 years as a painful and bewildering period. The embargoes which kill millions of people will be subject to review by international human rights courts. The millions killed by the tobacco industry will be the evidence of the loss of balance between protecting our community versus the obsessive compulsion to maximize corporate profits and shareholder wealth. For the last 40 years the corporate machine has ensured that the use of force would be available whenever necessary. Much of the rest of the world is very aware of this market dynamic. However, the conintued use of force and might can only be maintained in two scenarios: if the citizens are supportive of the policies; or if the press manipulates the motivations and effects of such policies. The U.S. corporate machine has aggressively controlled the mainstream press for many years. The accelerated consolidation of every aspect of the media channels over the past 5 years has solidified the control over the content and means of distribution of what is clearly an in-house public relations firm for the corporate interests and wealthy class. The wonderful notion of free press must be qualified in the U.S.: its free as long as it doesn\'t challenge the structural policies of the corporate machine. Even Europe is willing to allow for a healthy debate over the substantive issues which affect our policies. The information that challenges these policies is available. However, the corporate media machine will not allow for an open and honest debate. Rather, the last remaining soapbox is the streets. Benaroya Symphony Hall in downtown Seattle was the home of international experts expressing concerns for 2 days this past weekend. Yet, the mainstream press barely paid lip service to these intelligent and thoughtful positions. Rather, the mainstream press has covered only 2 stories: more trade is better (ignoring the implicit dilemma of the need for a healthy balance and the need for participation of all segments of our community in debating and formulating policies); and the activists are childish and not to be trusted in their extreme views. This country will now undergo a significant transformation which will evolve in one of two directions: a further tightening of the manipulation and blackout of the voices of concern; or the explosion of positive change supported by diverse communities with the intellect, commitment and ability to influence the course of history. Karma, the strength of the human spirit and finally the power of the internet, satellite and faxes lead me to bet on the latter outcome. If the latter vision prevails, the possibilities are unlimited. -- Respectfully, J
Re: [IFWP] A funny thing happened on the way from DC
At 08:42 AM 5/30/00, Michael Sondow wrote: >Hans Klein wrote: > > > >>Forwarded mail: > > >> > > >>> > > >>>As one of the dozens of industry attendees at > > >>>yesterday's meeting, I prepared a short summary > > >>>to describe the essential features, since there > > >>>appear to be some misunderstandings passed around. > > >What is this? It has no date, no name, no specifics of any kind on >it. Who wrote it? When? Where? The original comments were by Tony Rutkowski, if I remember correctly. The secondary comments were mine, after my first trip into the bowels of the Government. Jay. > >Michael Sondow I.C.I.I.U. http://www.iciiu.org >Tel. (718)846-7482 Fax: (603)754-8927 > Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
Re: [IFWP] RE: S.D.Dellheim Companies?
At 10:50 PM 5/29/00, Craig Simon wrote: >Try this for the PAB archives. http://songbird.com/pab/mail/ > >Which IANA archives don't work? As far as I can tell, it's [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was the list that people were supposed to use to send comments on the five draft by-laws that eventually morphed into ICANN. It's an important part of the historical record. It contains many examples of how Joe Sims and Co. systematically ignored comments and suggestions from the Internet community. A copy of the IANA censured email below can be read at: http://www.iperdome.com/releases/981007.htm Jay. >Craig Simon > >Jay Fenello wrote: > > > > At 07:14 PM 5/29/00, Richard J. Sexton wrote: > > >At 06:14 PM 5/29/00 -0400, you wrote: > > > >At 07:53 PM 5/17/00, Richard J. Sexton wrote: > > > >>Doesn't seem that important. It's not like poeple can't > > > >>figure out [deleted] means S.D.Dellheim Companies > > > > > > > > > > > >It's not just the name that > > > >is missing, is it? > > > > > > > >Is there any way to revert > > > >to the complete archives? > > > > > > > >Jay. > > > > > >Dunno. Who has 'em? The original PAB archives seem to be censored. > > > > Seems like the IANA archives > > are censored too! > > > > Iperdome Calls for Accountability > > ...Calls for Accountability From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date:... > > ...List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > > www.iana.org/comments-mail/msg00014.html > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Jay Fenello, > > New Media Strategies > > > > http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 > > Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World > > > > "If we want to change the world, we have to > > begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] WTO VS. DEMOCRACY?
FYI: http://accuracy.org/press_releases/PR120199.htm WTO VS. DEMOCRACY? REP. DENNIS KUCINICH A letter to President Clinton initiated by Rep. Kucinich (D-Ohio) and signed by 113 House Democrats says: "The WTO infringes on the sovereignty of nations to enforce worker rights. A proposed bill to ban products made with child labor is WTO-illegal..." Speaking to World Trade Watch, a daily national radio program co-produced in Seattle this week by the Institute for Public Accuracy, Kucinich stressed "how important it is for the people to stand up for their rights." The congressman said that a basic issue is citizens' "control over civic institutions and over their own government... that people can make decisions about clean air, clean water, human rights, better health care, better retirement. If private interests are simply running things, then that means that people are at their mercy... The market is not going to be parceling out democratic rights." Kucinich warned of "sacrificing human existence on the altar of the great dollar bill." He specifically criticized the Clinton administration's plan for a working group on labor conditions as "simply window-dressing" that lacks real substance or power. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
Re: [IFWP] RE: S.D.Dellheim Companies?
At 07:14 PM 5/29/00, Richard J. Sexton wrote: >At 06:14 PM 5/29/00 -0400, you wrote: > >At 07:53 PM 5/17/00, Richard J. Sexton wrote: > >>Doesn't seem that important. It's not like poeple can't > >>figure out [deleted] means S.D.Dellheim Companies > > > > > >It's not just the name that > >is missing, is it? > > > >Is there any way to revert > >to the complete archives? > > > >Jay. > >Dunno. Who has 'em? The original PAB archives seem to be censored. Seems like the IANA archives are censored too! Iperdome Calls for Accountability ...Calls for Accountability From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date:... ...List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... www.iana.org/comments-mail/msg00014.html Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] ICANN's ccTLD Tax
The agenda continues . . . Excerpts from: >Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 15:36:04 -0400 >From: Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: (Fwd) Re: CATO on ICANN > >Trying to distill your thoughts into a >short paragraph, you believe: > >That ICANN is really about technical >coordination, not policies. That if >ICANN would just give up their policy >agenda, then everything is ok with the >current setup. And even though they >have closed board meetings, and they >have violated their own bylaws, etc., >you feel that the technical community >is strong enough to keep ICANN under >control. (Please correct if I'm off) > >My reply is that you are ignoring >thousands of years of history, about >how people and organizations consolidate >power, and what happens after they do. > >Your belief that your technical comrades >can keep ICANN under control is probably >where we disagree the most. ICANN is a >political creature, one that makes deals >along the way to support its ever increasing >agenda. > >While the technocracy is strong and unified, >you will be catered to by the powers within >ICANN, so that pressure can be brought to >bear on those targeted by ICANN. Initially, >this will be NSI, then the ccTLDs, then the >RIRs. Finally it *will* be the technocracy >itself. > >It is a classic progression whereby ICANN >uses a divide and conquer approach to assume >total control. > >Welcome to your future . . . > >Jay. ICANN has always denied that this was their true agenda. However, in the year since this has been written, NSI has been broken, and is now a willing participant in the takeover of the Internet. ccTLDs are next! Below, from a public list, is an exchange with Mike Roberts and a ccTLD registry. They are debating why .za should pay ICANN's tax. (or mandatory fee, if you prefer ;-) - Forwarded From: Mike Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [IOZ] Re: Financial Support for ICANN To: Mike Lawrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: IOZ List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike - Nice to hear from you. I gather that .za has lots of changes ahead of it in the near future. If we can be of assistance, please let me know. As the largest ccTLD in Africa, and the recent host of the meetings regarding AFRINIC, etc., we appreciate the leadership you are providing for the Internet in your part of the world. Even though the process leading to the creation of ICANN has been going on for several years and has involved extensive consultation with all parties, I can understand that the complexity of our organizations might result in some misunderstandings. Let me make a few comments about your text below in the interests of clarity and improved communication. (1) ICANN has been created to assume responsibility for policy development and administration of a number of technical management responsibilities associated with Internet domain names and addresses and protocols. We are not a service organization except to the minor extent required by administration of our policy responsibilities. (2) The financial structure of ICANN is based on proportionate contributions to our policy making activities from registries and registrars - gTLDs, ccTLDs and Address Registries. The current contribution shares were worked out last year by a task force composed of members of the registries and registrars. They were publicly discussed and adopted by the ICANN Board last November. If you have questions about how the process worked, and what the detailed recommendations of the task force about funding were, the report is easily accessible on our web site at (3) The benefit of supporting ICANN fundamentally lies in the premise that the Internet community and more particularly those organizations and individuals who are directly involved with domain names and addresses wish to take responsibility for self-rgulation of this important area of activity. What the US government previously sponsored Jon Postel to do is now the responsibility of the community, including the responsibility to fund the expenses necessary to carry out ICANN's mission. I hope that you will agree with me that it is in the interest of .za to continue to carry forward the public trust relationship it has had with IANA, even though this now requires a funding commitment to ICANN. (4) A number of ccTLDs have suggested that there may be a formula for allocating the $1.5 million share of our current year expense which the funding task force allocated to the ccTLDs in a more equitable manner than the gTLD formula used in calculating your invoice. I'd like to emphasize that ICANN remains open to the use of such an alternative formula, provided that it is broadly supported in the ccTLD community and can be applied in an equitable manner to all ccTLD organizations. Regards, -Mike At 15:40 +0200 5
Re: [IFWP] RE: S.D.Dellheim Companies?
At 07:53 PM 5/17/00, Richard J. Sexton wrote: >Doesn't seem that important. It's not like poeple can't >figure out [deleted] means S.D.Dellheim Companies It's not just the name that is missing, is it? Is there any way to revert to the complete archives? Jay. >At 04:30 PM 5/17/00 -0700, Roeland Meyer (E-mail) wrote: > >Boy, it's a good thing that I pulled down my own copy . > > > >Not meaning to be too argumentative Richard, but wy did you give > >in and why did you feel the need to be "too tired to argue"? > >Personally, the archives are public words. No newspaper would > >have done it either. It sort of invalidates the archives, you > >know? It's the first step towards revisionism, the next step is > >re-insertion. > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Owner-Domain-Policy > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > >> Behalf Of Richard J. Sexton > >> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 4:22 PM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: S.D.Dellheim Companies? > >> > >> > >> I got a few phone calls and emails from this fellow asking me > >to > >> remove all references to his name from the PAB archives that > >> I maintain a mirror of on newdom.com. > >> > >> I really didn't like the idea of doing this, to my mind > >> archived are either complete or they're not, but he > >> was veryu polite, firm and insitant and I was basically > >> too tired to argue. > >> > >> So, anywhere you see [Deleted] in the PAB arrhives on > >newdom.com > >> pretend the words S.D.Dellheim Companies was there. > >> > >> Is anybody else getting mail from S.D.Dellheim Companies about > >this? > >> > >> > >> -- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://ph-1.613.473.1719 > >> It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good > >beer. - BKR > > > > >-- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ph-1.613.473.1719 >It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR > Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
Re: [IFWP] Were you consulted?
I was not consulted either. I suspect Mike Roberts means that he consulted the same people who put him in office ;-) Jay. At 10:01 AM 5/16/00, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote: >As you may know, ICANN suddenly announced last week that it has formed >Election and Nominating Committees, without any visible public input. >The announcement is at >http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr09may00.htm . > >Commentary suggesting that there were a few flaws in the process can be >found at http://www.icannwatch.org > >In response to this criticism, ICANN CEO Mike Roberts is quoted in today's >New York Times as saying that "Icann directors and staff worked hard to >consult widely in the process of forming these committees," >http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/cyber/capital/16capital.html . > >As far as I can tell, no one I know was consulted, and am I in touch with >a lot of people interested in ICANN. My suspicion is that if ICANN did >engage in consultations at all they were limited to participants in the >late gTLD-MOU and/or representatives of large corporations. > >In order to test this intuition, I would be very interested in hearing >from anyone who was actually consulted by ICANN prior to this >announcement, whatever their affiliation. > >[This message is being cross-posted widely; please feel free to circulate >as appropriate until May 25, 2000] >-- > >A. Michael Froomkin |Professor of Law| [EMAIL PROTECTED] >U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA >+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm > -->It's warm here.<-- Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] FINANCING PLANET MANAGEMENT
istory yet refuse to act in accordance with the lessons that are apparent. Past civilizations have collapsed and perished by their own making and by stubborn adherence to their profit and power paradigms. The unchecked depletion and destruction of natural resources and eco-systems, is an old story repeating again and again. In every case where there was the holding of land by the few out of the hands of most, the result was the horror of war or economic collapse. The nation-state country-clubs have not been able to rise from the muck of myopic views and economic illusions. Hartzok drops the veils through which we see economics and profits courageously calls for a gentle revolution in our relationship to the planet-one that is not only necessary, but vital to our very survival." Mary Rose Kaczorowski Action Coalition For Global Change Ten Mile River Watershed Association "Ms. Hartzok has a firm, intuitive grasp of basic economic and political principles." Dr. Mason Gaffney, Professor of Economics University of California, Riverside Dear Reader, I invite your comments on this essay which, with your permission, may be printed in whole or in part in future editions. I invite your questions as well, which I will try to answer in correspondence back to you. Please write comments and/or questions on a separate page and send or fax back with this form. Most sincerely yours, Alanna Hartzok [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alanna, You have my permission to print my comments, in whole or in part, in the next edition of this publication. Signature __ Date _ Name (clearly print or type) __ Line of work, Association, etc. ___ YES! I have checked Yes to include my signature on the growing list of those endorsing the International Declaration on Individual and Common Rights to Earth. YES! Put me in touch with others in my area who are working to implement these ideas. Street Address, Apt., P.O. Box City, Town ___ State, Zip _ Home Phone ___ Work Phone _ Fax # PLEASE MAIL OR FAX THIS PAGE TO: Alanna Hartzok, P.O. Box328, Scotland, PA 17254 USA Message Phone/FAX: 717-263-2820 Res.: 717-264-0957 Earth Rights Institute Box 328 Scotland, PA, 17254, USA Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Re: ICANN's Latest Outrage
At 11:15 PM 5/11/00, Jay Fenello wrote: >FYI: > Sorry, Should have added that this intro was from icannwatch.org >ICANN's Latest Outrage > >Bret Fausett, a long-time ICANN observer, describes how ICANN kept its >plans to create a one-sided Nomination Committee secret. It was easy: >ICANN just violated its own by-laws. ICANNs (rather weak) transparency >rules require that minutes of secret Board meetings be published in 3 >weeks; ICANN gave itself just enough extra time to make sure no one knew >what was going on. So much for "transparency". > >The article also contrasts the secretive method of picking the NomCom with >the more open methods used previously; where was the Call for Participation? > >Mr. Fausett asks why it is that the group selecting candidates for the >At-Large is composed entirely of representatives of Board members and of >groups already well represented elsewhere in the ICANN structure -- and >has no representatives of users. > >http://www.lextext.com/21days.html > >Respectfully, > >Jay Fenello, >New Media Strategies > >http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 >Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World > >"If we want to change the world, we have to >begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] ICANN's Latest Outrage
FYI: ICANN's Latest Outrage Bret Fausett, a long-time ICANN observer, describes how ICANN kept its plans to create a one-sided Nomination Committee secret. It was easy: ICANN just violated its own by-laws. ICANNs (rather weak) transparency rules require that minutes of secret Board meetings be published in 3 weeks; ICANN gave itself just enough extra time to make sure no one knew what was going on. So much for "transparency". The article also contrasts the secretive method of picking the NomCom with the more open methods used previously; where was the Call for Participation? Mr. Fausett asks why it is that the group selecting candidates for the At-Large is composed entirely of representatives of Board members and of groups already well represented elsewhere in the ICANN structure -- and has no representatives of users. http://www.lextext.com/21days.html Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Chomsky on MS and Corporate Takeover of the Internet
much enhanced in the last 25 years through the so-called telecommunications revolution, which was a revolution largely within the state sector. Most of the system was designed, developed, and maintained at public expense, then handed over to private profit. State actions also broke down the post-war international economic system, the Bretton Woods system in the early 1970s. It was dismantled by Richard Nixon, with US and British initiative primarily. The system of regulation of capital flows was dismantled, and that, along with the state-initiated telecommunications revolution led to an enormous explosion of speculative capital flow, which is now well over a trillion dollars a day, and is mostly non-productive. If you go back to around 1970, international capital flows were about 90% related to the real economy, like trade and investment. By now, at most a few percent are related to the real economy. Most have to do with financial manipulations, speculations against currencies, things which are really destructive to the economy. And that is a change that wasn't true, not only wasn't true 100 years ago, it wasn't true 40 years ago. So there are changes. And you can see their effects. That's surely part of the reason for the fact that the recent period, the last 25 years, has been a period of unusually slow economic growth, of low productivity growth, of stagnation or decline of wages and incomes for probably two thirds of the population, even in a rich country like this. And enormously high profits for a very small part of the population. And it's worse in the Third World. You can read in the New York Times, the lead article in the "Week in Review" yesterday, Sunday, April 12, that America is prospering and happy. And you look at the Americans they're talking about, it turns out it's not the roughly two thirds of the population whose incomes are stagnating or declining, it's the people who own stock. So, ok, they're undoubtedly doing great, except that about 1% of households have about 50% of the stock, and it's roughly the same with other assets. Most of the rest is owned by the top 10% of the population. So sure, America is happy, and America is prosperous, if America means what the New York Times means by it. They're the narrow set of elites that they speak for and to. CW: What kinds of things can people do to try to expand and reclaim democracy and the public space from corporations? NC: Well, the first thing they have to do is find out what's happening to them. So if you have none of that information, you can't do much. For example, it's impossible to oppose, say, the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, if you don't know it exists. That's the point of the secrecy. You can't oppose the specific form of globalization that's taking place, unless you understand it. You'd have to not only read the headlines which say market economy's triumphed, but you also have to read Alan Greenspan, the head of the Federal Reserve, when he's talking internally; when he says, look the health of the economy depends on a wonderful achievement that we've brought about, namely "worker insecurity." That's his term. Worker insecurity--that is not knowing if you're going to have a job tomorrow. It is a great boon for the health of the economy because it keeps wages down. It's great: it keeps profits up and wages down. Well, unless people know those things, they can't do much about them. So the first thing that has to be done is to create for ourselves, for the population, systems of interchange, interaction, and so on. Like Corporate Watch, Public Citizen, other popular groupings, which provide to the public the kinds of information and understanding, that they won't otherwise have. After that they have to struggle against it, in lots of ways which are open to them. It can be done right through pressure on Congress, or demonstrations, or creation of alternative institutions. And it should aim, in my opinion, not just at narrow questions, like preventing monopoly, but also at deeper questions, like why do private tyrannies have rights altogether? CW: What do you think about the potential of all the alternative media that's burgeoning on the Internet, given the current trends? NC: That's a matter for action, not for speculation. It's like asking 40 years ago what's the likelihood that we'd have a minimal health care system like Medicare? These things happen if people struggle for them. The business world, Microsoft, they're highly class conscious. They're basically vulgar marxists, who see themselves engaged in a bitter class struggle. Of course they're always going to be at it. The question is whether they have that field to themselves. And the deeper question is whether they should be allowed to participate; I don't think they should. ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] AN ACTIVIST AMONGST THE ROBBER BARONS
ot; by hauling bags of coal from a dump yard to a steel mill. He stressed, however, that the children do not work directly in the steel mill. He was greeted by a hearty round of applause. INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE AND TRADE POLICY http://www.iatp.org From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Neufeld Weaver, Worthington MN) ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] A GREEN TAX POLICY APPROACH
draws from the following: > >*The Natural Wealth of Nations* Worldwatch Institute, David Roodman >*Tax Shift* Northwest Environment Watch, Alan Durning & Yoram Bauman >*Taxed out of Work and Wealth* Nicolaus Tideman & Florenz Plassman >* An Inventory of Rent-Yielding Resources* Mason Gaffney >*The Losses of Nations* Institute for Land Policy, Fred Harrison >*A Citizens Guide to Environmental Tax Shifting* Friends of the Earth >* Global Public Goods, edited by Inge Kaul, Isabelle Grunberg, Marc A. >Stern >* ³Brazil: The Meek Want the Earth Now,² Bulletin of the Atomic >Scientists, Fabio L.S. Petrarolpha, >*The United Nations: Policy and Financing Alternatives, edited by Harlan >Cleveland, Hazel Henderson, Inge Kaul >*UNDP at Crossroads* Earth Times, C. Gerald Fraser >* Planet Champions, Jack Yost >* UN Habitat II Action Agenda >*Third World Intervention: A New Analysis* David Smiley >*Factor 10 Club Carnoules Declaration* Wuppertal Institute >*Overseas Development Institute , Michael Carley & Philippe Spapens >*Sharing the World * Anil Agarwal & Sunita Narain >*Privatizing Nature: Political Struggles for the Global Commons*, >Michael Goldman >*The Pollution Dividend* Peter Barnes >*How the Other Half Dies* Susan George >*Ecological Tax Reform* Hanno Beck in *Land Value Taxation* Kenneth >Wenzer >*Harnessing the Tax Code for Environmental Protection* State Tax Notes, >J. Andrew Hoerner >*Stateless Corporations: Lords of the Global Economy* The Nation, >Richard J. Barnet >*Tax Reform Follies*, Dollars & Sense, Chuck Collins & John Miller >*The Eagle Dies on Friday* Utne Reader, David Brauer >*Tax Waste Not Work* , Redefining Progress, M. Jeff Hammond >*Benefits and Taxes* New Economics Foundation, James Robertson Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] On Media Monopoly
Original Message Subject: Antitrust & the Media Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:58:39 -0400 From: enrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.greens,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.media,alt.journalism,talk.politics.misc May 22, 2000 Antitrust & the Media--I E-mail this story to a friend. This spring the topic of antitrust returned to the headlines after a long absence as the government pursued and won (for the time being) its case against Microsoft and, in a more muted way, as Time Warner and Disney got into a fight over distribution that is part of a high-stakes battle for control of access to America's homes. Let's hope that the two cases will reinvigorate the notion of antitrust in our political culture. Over the past year or two there have been rumblings that antitrust should go beyond its current narrow application to firms that have virtual monopolies in markets and return to its original populist purpose of breaking up concentrated wealth as a cancer on democratic governance. If this takes place, most experts argue, corporate media will be first on any target list. After a decade of deal-making, the US system is now dominated by nine massive media conglomerates. Although not one is a monopoly of any one national market à la Microsoft or Standard Oil, these are closed markets for all intents and purposes. And, as the AOL/Time Warner marriage highlighted, these firms have largely tamed the commercialized Internet. It is not merely their economic power, or even their cultural power, that causes concern. It is their political power. They have grown so large that they are close to being untamable by government. On Capitol Hill progressive legislators like Senator Paul Wellstone have announced their support for applying antitrust to the existing media system. "There's no question that we have to start talking in a serious way about media, about media mergers and monopolies, about the balance between public and commercial television, about how we can encourage more diversity in ownership and in content, about the role that media plays in a democracy where most people don't vote," says Wellstone. Nor is this an issue with appeal only to the left. When Time Warner briefly removed Disney's ABC from its cable offerings in several cities in early May, New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani told reporters, "This is an example of what happens when you allow monopolies to get too big and they become too predatory and then the consumer is hurt. For the life of me, I can't figure out why the Justice Department has spent so much time on Microsoft and so little on this industry." Applying antitrust to media will not be enough. Even with an enlightened policy of media ownership in the digital age, there would still be too much power in the hands of owners and advertisers. That is why antitrust must be complemented by an aggressive and wide-ranging program to establish a viable nonprofit and noncommercial media sector. But using antitrust powers would at least be a beginning. Robert W. McChesney E-mail this story to a friend. Robert W. McChesney, a professor at the University of Illinois, is the author of Rich Media, Poor Democracy (Illinois). ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Re: Letter about use of Procurement Control to Privatize Public Resources
> >Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:42:17 -0400 (EDT) > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Letter about use of Procurement Control to Privatize Public > Resources > > > > > >Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:35:59 -0400 (EDT) > >From: Ronda Hauben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: about the Federal Procurement Contract for ICANN > > > >Letter sent to Teresa Reefe at NIST to protest Federal Procurement > >Contract being used to Privatize Public Resources > > > > > >Dear Teresa > > > >I am curious about the use of a federal procurement contract to give > >away government held public resources to a private sector corporation > >like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. > > > >This seems an inappropriate use of a procurement contract and there > >doesn't seem to be an appropriate authority to give public resources, > >especially crucially important infrastructure resources like IP numbers, > >the domain name system, and the protocols organization into the > >ownership and/or control of a private sector corporation via the kind > >of contract that the US government uses to purchase goods and services > >for government entities. > > > >Can you explain why this is the means of privatizating such crucial > >public resources? > > > >I offered one of the proposals for how to determine an appropriate > >form for the care and administration of these crucial public resources > >to the Department of Commerce before the ICANN proposal was submitted. > > > >My proposal did not get any serious attention by any Dept of Commerce > >official. Instead they awarded a design and test contract to ICANN. > >The activity of ICANN has not been of a "design and test" nature > >as they cut off discussion and limit public imput into their process. > >Interim board members were selected by some secret process that has > >yet to be made public. And they are taking over the control and potentially > >ownership of a vital public resource without any public process or > >legitimate procedures. > > > >If the process were indeed a design and test process, my proposal would > >have been accepted. > > > >Thus can you please accept this as a protest of the award of public > >resources to ICANN under a contract drawn up for totally different > >purposes. > > > >I also want to protest that ICANN is not carrying out any design and > >test activities under their current memorandum of agreement with the > >Department of Commerce. > > > >And I want to ask that you inform me of what procedures I have > >available to me to challenge how public property and resources are > >being taken from the public and given to ICANN. > > > >Sincerely > > > >Ronda Hauben > >244 West 72nd Street Apt 15D > >New York, N.Y. 10023 > > > >(212)787-9361 Hi Ronda, I echo your concerns and questions. One option available to you is to inform the GAO investigators of your experience with the Commerce Department. FYI: Jay. From ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/cp106/hr398.txt NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES The conferees direct the General Accounting Office to review the relationship between the Department of Commerce and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and to issue a report no later than June, 2000. The conferees request that GAO review: (1) the legal basis for the selection of U.S. representatives to ICANN's interim board and for the expenditure of funds by the Department for the costs of U.S. representation and participation in ICANN's proceedings; (2) whether U.S. participation in ICANN proceedings is consistent with U.S. law, including the Administrative Procedures Act; (3) a legal analysis of the Department of Commerce's opinion that OMB Circular A 25 provides ICANN, as a ``project partner'' with the Department of Commerce, authority to impose fees on Internet users for ICANN's operating costs; and (4) whether the Department has the legal authority to transfer control of the authoritative root server to ICANN. In addition, the conferees seek GAO's evaluation and recommendations regarding placing responsibility for U.S. participation in ICANN under the National Institute of Standards and Technology rather than NTIA, and request that GAO review the adequacy of security arrangements under existing Departmental cooperative agreements. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] GAO Scrutinizes ICANN
The New York Times Scoops the Rest (again)! FYI: http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/cyber/capital/02capital.html Congressional Investigators Scrutinize Internet Oversight Group By JERI CLAUSING May 2, 2000 WASHINGTON -- The Internet's always controversial oversight body, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann), is facing a new round of scrutiny that promises to reignite a nearly two-year-old debate over the validity of its creation, its mission and its authority. The General Accounting Office, the independent investigative arm of Congress, has been contacting nearly everyone who has ever had anything to do with the process that created Icann for a comprehensive report that is due on June 30. Icann has been the subject of intense controversy since it was picked by the Clinton administration in late 1998 to oversee the Internet's addressing, or domain name system, and to introduce competition into the lucrative business of registering domains. Among the questions the GAO apparently will be trying to answer is whether the Clinton administration had the legal authority to hand administration of the Internet to a private entity and how ICANN was selected. ###
[IFWP] IODesign Supports Creation of New Top-Level Domains
FYI: Image Online Design Supports Creation of New Top-Level Domains ".Web Registry Ready to Compete Now, Registry is Only Immediate Competition for .Com" SAN LUIS OBISPO, April 27, 2000 /PRNewswire/ -- Image Online Design, Inc. (www.iodesign.com), The .Web Internet Domain Registry today announced its support for the creation of additional Top-Level Domains for the Internet, agreeing with the Names Council of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in its call to add new Top-Level domains as soon as possible. "The goal is to create competition for .Com," said Image Online Design CEO John Frangie, "Right now, there is only one new registry operational and ready to compete with .Com, and that is our .Web Registry." Image Online Design participated in the working group chartered by ICANN to examine the possibility of adding new domains to the Internet. That working group found that consensus existed for their creation, and recommended that six to ten new domains be created. The Names Council, a group responsible for forwarding the report to ICANN, agreed with the consensus to add new domains, but urged that the number be small and carefully managed. "While we feel that six to ten was the best number, the fact that new domains have broad support is very encouraging," added Frangie. Image Online Design has had an operational registry for .Web since 1996, when the discussion about adding new domains began. Image Online Design has proposed that its .Web registry be added as competition to Network Solutions' (NSOL) .Com monopoly. The .Web registry could make use of the existing legal and procedural infrastructures that already are in place for .com. Programmers for Image Online Design are now completing testing on the Registry-Registrar Protocol that is currently in use by all .com registrars. "We are prepared to provide the exact same services that are available with .com now," added Frangie. The Names Council indicated that a proper starting point would be the creation of both "open" as well as "restricted" top-level domains. "We feel that our .Web registry is the clear choice for the open aspect of the initial roll-out of new domains," said Image Online Design Founder, Christopher Ambler, ".Web is the longest-standing pioneer registry, and is the only registry that is currently operational and in a position to compete with .com right now." Image Online Design plans to release a position paper on Tuesday, May 2nd, detailing its support for adding new Top-Level domains, and presenting a plan for adding new domains in a stable and measured manner. The .Web Registry is currently online and available at http://webtld.com. About Image Online Design, Inc. Founded in 1995, Image Online Design, Inc. is the pioneer registry for Internet Domains ending in .Web. Beginning operations in 1996, The .Web Internet Domain Registry went online at the urging of the Internet Assigned Numbering Authority, the predecessor to ICANN. Initially expected to be a proof-of-concept prior to the addition of new domains in early 1997, the registry has been continuously operational during the 4 years of debate that has framed the governance of the Internet. With registrations from over 75 countries worldwide, Image Online Design and The .Web Internet Domain Registry are the leader in pioneering and prospective new top-level domain registries. .Web, and The .Web Internet Domain Registry are trademarks of Image Online Design, Inc. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Beware of Monopolies
points: "Proof of concept" a deceptive ruse The NSI proposal is based on the false premise that authorizing a new top-level domain registry is a step into unknown territory. The small number is justified as reflecting the need for "proof of concept." But technical experts agree that there are no technical barriers to adding thousands of new names to the root. Operationally, there is nothing new or untested about adding new top-level registries to the Internet root. The TLD .int for international organizations was added a few years ago with no significant problems. The late technologist Jon Postel, who administered the DNS root for more than a decade, drafted a proposal defining procedures for adding 150 new TLDs back in 1996. In 1994 alone, 50 new country code TLDs were added to the root, and country code TLDs operate in the same way as .com/net/org TLDs. There is simply no evidence for NSIs claim that new TLDs require "proof of concept." The European gambit NSIs proposal to locate the new .shop registry in Europe is a calculated attempt to win political favor for the proposal. US-European rivalry has played a major role in the domain name wars, and the Europeans are extremely sensitive to their status. However, the move could also be seen as an attempt to pre-empt European efforts to create their own new registry under the .EU or .EUR TLD. A new, truly European TLD would attract much more business registrations from Europe than NSIs proposed .shop, and cut into the dominance of dot com. Shared ownership of the new registry by ICANN-accredited registrars 60 percent of which are American would further dilute European market share. The small number of new TLDs under the NSI proposal also shuts out other regions, such as the growing Asia-Pacific region. Conclusions If ICANN implements NSIs suggestions, NSIs dominance of the domain name market would be prolonged for another year or more. Management of the domain name space will take on all the features of an international cartel. The NSI proposal offers vested interests privileged access to the new name space while shutting out consumers, non-commercial organizations, and independent entrepreneurs. Members of the public can submit comments to ICANN on the new gTLD issue at this web site: http://www.icann.org/dnso/new-gtlds-01apr00.htm Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] ICANN Protest Grows!
WOW! That's the most signatures I ever seen on an ICANN protest document. http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/support.html Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Weird email Problem [off topic]
Hello Everyone, Today I received 15 blank email messages which I suspect were real. This is a recent yet ongoing problem. If you have sent me an email that I haven't responded to, please resend. Also, if anyone has had this problem before, suggestions are welcome. Here's what arrived in my inbox: (8:33 is when I hit my pop server) From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 From ???@??? Tue Apr 25 08:33:40 2000 Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Iperdome Asks GAO to Expand Investigation into ICANN
Iperdome Asks GAO to Expand Investigation into ICANN Atlanta, April 24, 2000 /PRNewswire/ -- Iperdome, Inc. (www.iperdome.com), the company founded to offer Personal Domain Name Services under the .per (SM) brand and Top Level Domain (TLD), today announced that it is calling on the U.S. Government's General Accounting Office to expand its investigation into ICANN. Iperdome alleges that the Commerce Department has been negligent in its mission to promote "job creation, economic growth, sustainable development and improved living standards for all Americans," as well as its mission to promote "U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace by strengthening and safeguarding the nation's economic infrastructure." Instead, the Commerce Department's actions have severely damaged the domestic registry industry, destabilized the existing DNS system, and created a secretive and unaccountable global governing body for the Internet. Iperdome was formed back in January, 1997, and quickly joined with a handful of other companies to form eDNS, a free market attempt to expand the name space. Unfortunately, through years of delays, broken promises, and suspicious Commerce Department activities, eDNS and most of its companies have ceased or suspended operations. And instead of a vibrant, competitive, inexpensive name space that eDNS would have provided, we now have an unstable, expensive, and constrained one. Iperdome testified to Congress as a representative of this industry back in June, 1998 (www.iperdome.com/responses/testimony.htm), and warned of the importance of this process as well as some dangerous trends. Unfortunately, it is only the dangerous trends which have continued. It is time for the U.S. Government to acknowledge this fact, and fix it, before it's too late. And it's up to the GAO to make it happen, as no other part of the federal government seems willing or able to do so. Iperdome suspended operations in September, 1999, after ICANN president Mike Roberts admitted that ICANN would never allow a registry like Iperdome to exist. The General Accounting Office is the investigative arm of Congress, with a mission to help oversee federal programs and operations, and to assure accountability to the American people. The GAO's investigation is being led by Ed Warner, and was authorized by Congress in Conference Report #106479. It is expected by June, 2000. ### Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Disgusted with ICANN !?
;s diagnosed by symptoms, so many of the 'AIDS' cases are actually TB and other diseases that are easily preventable and treatable if they had minimal health facilities. Attributing the deaths to 'AIDS' covers for the culpability of the West in the deteriorating health conditions in Africa and implies that there's little to be done except get Africans to use condoms, which dovetails with the World Bank's obsession with population control; it also plays to sexual stereotypes. The IMF has also ordered currency devaluations which have severely curtailed drug imports." QUENTIN DRISKELL, http://www.nlg.org An attorney with the National Conference of Black Lawyers and the National Lawyers Guild, Driskell is providing legal assistance to protesters. He said: "There's a complete atmosphere of repression in Washington: the illegitimate preemptive arrests, the expansion of the restricted area around the World Bank building, the storming of the Convergence Center. The authorities seem bent on not allowing peaceful protests to go forward. The tactics that they've resorted to almost seem as if they're trying to goad protesters into acting out. I've been doing political work and protests for 25 years and I've never seen police action like this." [*compiled from the Institute for Public Accuracy] Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
[IFWP] Déja vu, or a time warp?
At 11:37 PM 4/19/00 , someone wrote: >Jay, > >It gives me the willies when I read how some people are just now >waking up to what we went through over a year ago. It makes me feel >like we´re caught in a time warp or something. Know what I mean? >It's as if nothing had happened in all this time. Frightening. I know exactly what you mean -- we are in a repeating pattern. We have a battle for control over the Internet being waged by those who have money, power, and influence, and their tactics are downright Machiavellian. As each new group of stakeholders learn about the Internet Governance process, they jump in, believing that things are consistent with their beliefs about the way the world works. Over time, they realize that the process is not fair, that the process is gamed, and that no-one in authority is willing to do anything about it. When that realization strikes, most people become disillusioned, and retreat from the process. Only a handful of knowledgeable old-timers are *crazy* enough to stay involved in the debate. The lesson that Jamie is learning now, is that flying around the world to attend ICANN meetings is only an inconvenience to the powers that be. What he is learning now, is that any good that he might have accomplished, will only delay the implementation of the predetermined solution. It's the same story, with different players, over and over and over and over again. That's why I continue to educate people to the history of ICANN, and I continue to keep my archives available at www.iperdome.com. Someday, I'll even go through my email, and put some selected ones online. And I'm not alone. That's why people like Ellen Rony and Ken Freed have archived the details of this history. That's why people like Larry Lessig and David Post continue to highlight the legal implications of this takeover. That's why people like Mikki Barry and I have placed our comments into the Congressional record. And that's why people like Gordon Cook have reported on the most egregious aspects of this fiasco. So, when I read about Working Group B springing a surprise Sunrise provision with less than 24 hours to comment, when I read about NSI springing a surprise TLD proposal from left field, and when I read about the NCDNHC delaying a "consensus" until it becomes a *different* "consensus," I am not surprised at all! It's just more of the same ;-( Jay. >James Love wrote: > > There is some question about why the NCDNHC meeting is important. In > > Cairo, by an overwhelming vote, we passed a resolution on new TLDs. > > Then, on this list, YJ Park said the Cairo resolution only reflected the > > views of the people there (true enough), and that it did not mean > > anything for NCDNHC. So, if we fly around the globe for a meeting, but > > whatever we do is considered meaningless, what have we accomplished? > > This is something we should at least talk about. Respectfully, Jay Fenello, New Media Strategies http://www.fenello.com 770-392-9480 Aligning with Purpose(sm) ... for a Better World "If we want to change the world, we have to begin by changing ourselves" -- Deepak Chopra
