ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    Government Advisory Committee (GAC) Australia Spent AU$ 3 million on GAC, But Will Stop Now
    posted by michael on Thursday March 21 2002, @06:55AM

    In an Australian Financial Review article that does not appear to be accessible online to non-subscribers, Nicole Lindsay reports today that Australia will stop funding the GAC after Australian Dr. Paul Twomey steps down as GAC chairman at ICANN's June meeting in Bucharest. Apparently, over the past three years, Australia has spent about AU$ 3 million (about $1.5 million in US dollars) on GAC support. (I was not aware of this. Does ICANN 'transparency' not extend to GAC expenditures or did I just miss it?)



    The article quotes an Australian government spokesman as saying that it was "about time someone else funded the committee after three years". The article also reports that, despite the price tag, "Several other countries have reportedly expressed informal interest in taking over administration of the GAC a task that comes with the chairmanship of the committee." (Yes, it's pay to play again.)

    Australia's chairmanship of the GAC was notable for the sweetheart deal by which ICANN re-delegated .au in violation of the rules on country-code re-delegation, gave it to the Australian government, which then became the first ccTLD to agree to ICANN's onerous model "pay and obey" contract for ccTLDs.

    Dr. Twomey, meanwhile, has set up a consulting firm with....Ira Magaziner.

     
      ICANNWatch Login  
    Nickname:

    Password:

    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

     
      Related Links  
  • GAC
  • ICANNWatch.org
  • violation of the rules on country-code re-delegation
  • first ccTLD to agree
  • Australian Financial Review
  • GAC
  •  
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Australia Spent AU$ 3 million on GAC, But Will Stop Now | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 12 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: Australia Spent AU$ 3 million on GAC, But Will
    by hofjes on Thursday March 21 2002, @07:41AM (#5479)
    User #60 Info
    This is a significant disclosure.

    ICANN has been insistent upon ccTLDs abiding by the so called GAC principles. Each of the IANA reports concerning redelegations have focused heavily on the new designated manager adopting and acting in strict accordance with the GAC principles. In fact, ICANN's comments indicate that ability to implement and enforce the GAC principles is the MOST important qualification of a ccTLD sponsoring organization. However, the board has never adopted, or even addressed, the GAC principles.

    The question has always been: why does ICANN put such weight on these GAC principles? The GAC is supposed to be merely an advisory panel. Unless the board adopts, or at least addresses, the GAC's recommendations, the the recommendations are just recommendations, and should not be deal points for ICANN contracts (espectially material deal points).

    Now we know why. Australia has been funding the GAC. It has been funding ICANN. ICANN management has to abide by GAC wishes, or it loses funding.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Australia Spent AU$ 3 million on GAC, But Will
    by hofjes on Thursday March 21 2002, @10:30AM (#5486)
    User #60 Info
    Where does the money go? The GAC shows up at the 3-4 meetings each year, deliberates a few issues, and goes home.

    Even if the GAC funded its members' travel, the cost would probably not exceed $20k each meeting ($60k-$80k each year).

    I wish we could see an accounting of the $3M expenses. I would bet that the money extends beyond GAC.

    ICANN will not open its books to Karl Auerbach or anybody else because there are likely a lot of funny numbers written. The $3M GAC contribution has to be recorded somewhere.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Another View?
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Thursday March 21 2002, @11:02AM (#5488)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    Having thought about this a bit, it seems to me at least possible that none of this money may actually have gone into the GAC's coffers. "GAC support" after all, could be supporting the attendence of people to the meetings, and maybe in-kind support, e.g. paying for the room. Conceivably GAC itself never saw the money....
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com