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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
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) ICANN Executive Committee Votes Funds to GAC
    posted by michael on Tuesday August 13 2002, @11:36AM

    ICANN, we are told is broke. That's one reason why we need this insider takeover. And, we're told over and over, all ICANN user groups are supposed to be self-supporting. And open. Even the secret advisory bits like the Government Advisory Committee are supposed to be self-supporting.

    ICANN says it is broke. So broke it cannot support any staff for the DNSO (even as ICANN's staff grows). So broke it can't do anything for end-user groups, or non-commercial groups, neither of whom have expense accounts like the industry-funded lawyers and lobbyists who swarm ICANN meetings and occupy many of the leading roles in its councils.

    But when the GAC needs money, ICANN heeds the call and sends US$75,000. Does ICANN have the guts to bring this radical change to the entire Board? Does it have the guts to do it in public at an open meeting? Or, perish the thought, give the public some advance notice of this radical change in ICANN's funding strategy (that's your domain name tax dollar at work, folks--it all comes from domain name registration fees in the end). No. It's done the way ICANN's embarrassing expenditures are always done: at secret meetings of the rump, the Executive Committee.

    Even people who usually support ICANN should raise an eyebrow at this one. And they have.

    Here's the text of the resolution by the Executive Committee. (In light of this, I have a simple suggestion: the committee should be abolished. Or its right to approve expenditures above $10,000 revoked.):

    Interim Support for GAC Functions

    Whereas, the Government of Australia generously provided both the chair and secretariat services to the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) beginning in February 1999;

    Whereas, at the March 2002 ICANN meeting in Accra, the Australian Government indicated that it would be unable to continue funding the GAC chair and secretariat functions past the time of ICANN's Bucharest meeting in June 2002;

    Whereas, in resolution 02.34 the ICANN Board expressed its deep appreciation to the Australian Government for its longstanding support and leadership in regard to ICANN;

    Whereas, the timing of the ongoing ICANN evolution and reform process makes it essential that the private-sector ICANN community communicate and coordinate closely with governments during this period, so that governmental concerns and suggestions can be appropriately taken into account;

    Whereas, in view of the consequent need for an uninterrupted secretariat function for the GAC, at the ICANN Bucharest meeting the Australian Government indicated a willingness to continue to provide services for the GAC provided it receives reimbursement of its costs;

    Whereas, the GAC provides a vital channel for consultation regarding views of governments on how ICANN can best serve the public interest;

    Whereas, the GAC Secretariat provides valuable consultation to ICANN staff regarding its communications with governments on redelegations and other matters;

    Whereas, the GAC Secretariat acts as a valuable source of information to governments regarding ICANN policies and procedures;

    Whereas, the GAC has formed a committee that is studying how the chair, secretariat, and other support functions for the GAC can best be provided and funded in the future, but that committee's report is not expected to be ready for action by the GAC before the ICANN Shanghai meeting in late October 2002;

    Whereas, the Executive Committee has therefore concluded that it is appropriate to provide reimbursement to the Australian Government for its actual costs of providing chair and secretariat services to the GAC through 15 November 2002, after which other arrangements for the provision of these services can come into operation;

    Resolved [EC02.8] that the President is authorized to provide reimbursement to the Australian Government for its actual costs of providing chair and secretariat services to the GAC, in a total amount not to exceed US$75,000, for the period ending 15 November 2002, after which alternative arrangements by the GAC to provide these functions can be implemented.

    Incidentally, odd things seem to be going on at the GAC -- did private-citizen-but-Australian-government-representative-for-this-purpose Dr. Paul Twomey step down as GAC chair, or not? Not clear from the GAC website. The accredited representative list still shows him as chair. But then it's dated July 1999....

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ 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
  • have
  • step down as GAC chair
  • GAC website
  • accredited representative list
  • sends US$75,000
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ICANN Executive Committee Votes Funds to GAC | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 8 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    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: ICANN Executive Committee Votes Funds to GAC
    by hofjes on Wednesday August 14 2002, @10:05AM (#8479)
    User #60 Info
    ICANN loves the GAC. When looking at redelegation reports, the factor most heavily weighed (in fact, almost exclusively weighed) is compliance with GAC Principles. However, the board never adopted the GAC principles. The GAC principles is just a document by an advisory panel to which the ICANN staff always defers.

    The ultimate query relevant to this thread is why ICANN is so deferential to the GAC. What is Paul Twomey’s role? What should the GAC role be? I think it should be merely advisory.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: ICANN Executive Committee Votes Funds to GAC
    by rhill on Friday August 16 2002, @04:12AM (#8537)
    User #3320 Info | http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/
    The following is posted at:


    A number of questions have been asked and comments made regarding the ICANN
    Board's recent decision to fund partly, for a limited period of time, the
    GAC secretariat and chair functions, see


    The following information, which is based on what I know, may answer some of
    the questions that have been raised.

    At the Accra meeting 11-12 March 2002, the Chair of GAC, Paul Twoomey,

    "... the Chair advised that he will be resigning effective from the end of
    the Shanghai meeting and the Australian Government will cease providing the
    Secretariat function at the end of the Bucharest meeting."

    The issue of replacing the GAC Secretariat was discussed at the 9-10 April
    GAC meeting in Bruxelles and the 3-4 June GAC meeting in Canberra.

    At both those meetings, some GAC members, and in particular ITU, offered to
    provide some secretariat services as in-kind support for GAC. Specifically,
    ITU offered to provide the basic secretariat support for meetings, at no
    cost to ICANN or to GAC (since the costs are already covered by ITU's

    These offers were noted but not discussed. It was noted that a global
    discussion of the nature and role of the GAC secretariat should take place
    in the context of ICANN reform.

    The GAC meeting in Bucharest was essentially focussed on preparing comments
    on the recently-published Blueprint for Reform. At the very end of the
    meeting, at 3am, Paul Twoomey announced that Australia had reversed its
    previous decision to stop funding the Chair and the Secretariat and was
    willing to fund both the Chair and the Secretariat for an interim period.
    As a consequence, the Chair announced that Australia would continue to
    provide the Secretariat.

    I am informed that subsequently the Australian government informed ICANN
    that it would be willing to perform the role of GAC Secretariat, but
    indicated that it would no longer fund that role. I am informed that the
    Australian government subsequently raised with ICANN the issue of finding
    alternative sources of funding.

    As noted in previous E-Mails, the Board made a decision to provide up to
    $75'000 dollars to the Australian goverment, to cover actual costs of chair
    and secretariat services for a limited period of time.

    I am informed that a draft budget for this funding, for the period 1 July to
    15 November, is being prepared by the GAC Secretariat and will be circulated
    to the GAC membership.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Something Else Used to Be Here
    by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Friday August 16 2002, @09:08AM (#8557)
    User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
    Consistent with the policies described in our FAQ, I've deleted an annonymous post that was (borderline) libelous. Due to the quirks of our software this results in deleting the two replies.

    Here is the text of the deted posts, with one line removed.

    Conspiracy? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 14 @ 17:34:18 MDT

    Something is fishy here.

    Paul Twomey is [FIVE WORDS DELETED HERE -MF] He is partners with Ira Magaziner who is responsible for the white paper giving rise to ICANN (and ultimately approving of ICANN as newco).

    Twomey controls the GAC. ICANN staff defers to the GAC as if the GAC were the board of directors.

    Now, ICANN authorizes $75k to GAC, which inevitably will be paid to Twomey and Magaziner.

    What's the real deal?

    Re: Conspiracy? (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, August 15 @ 07:16:50 MDT
    Given that Twomey is no longer employed by the Australian government nor does he represent the Australian government in the GAC, one has to ask why he is involved at all???

    Perhaps ICANN decided ... (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Thursday, August 15 @ 14:24:54 MDT
    That the best way to disarm the GAC would be to turn it into another ICANN board. That means it would need conflicts of interest, sleazy people, and board squatting.

    So they get this guy then ... I could have been really catty in this comment, I pulled my punch!
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply 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