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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Statement on USG .xxx Intervention Gains Support | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 100 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.
    I know something about potential conflicts
    by Anonymous on Saturday September 10 2005, @05:05AM (#16214)
    Serving on the ICANN Board, while also working as a consultant for
    registrars and registries, Serving on the ICANN Board, while also working as a consultant for
    registrars and registries, I know something about potential conflicts
    and how to handle them :-) First let me stress that these are my own
    personal comments. Obviously Vint will be updating his conflict of
    interest statement, and Hagen Hultsch as the Chair of the Board
    Conflicts Committee will be reviewing it in conjunction with the
    Conflicts Committee of which I also serve.

    My personal viewpoint, based upon what I currently know, is that it is
    possible that Vint may have to abstain in the future from some votes
    that come before the board.  However, even if that should be the case, I
    do not believe it would detract from the institutional knowledge,
    visionary guidance, and leadership that Vint provides to the Board and
    the ICANN community. Under the current conflicts policy, as well as the
    proposed modified conflicts policy discussed in Luxemburg, there are
    adequate mechanisms in place to handle these situations. It is important
    to realize that ICANN by its very nature is designed to have
    participants with a vested interest in ICANN, i.e. registrars, gTLD
    registries, ccTLDs registries, RIRs, etc. The important focus is the
    need for a series of checks and balances to ensure that an individual is
    not misusing his position within the ICANN structure (Board, staff,
    consultant, Supporting Organization, Council, etc) for financial gain.

    Although I have seen several comments about Google being a registrar, I
    am not aware if Google is operational. What jumped out at me first was
    Google's role in the traffic aggregation market, i.e. SiteFinder,
    deleted domain names, etc. Based upon what I know of the industry they
    are one of the organizations that spend a lot of money in this area.
    Please correct me if I am wrong.

    So I guess what I am trying to say is that it is premature to speculate
    about any potential conflicts until Vint updates his conflict statement.
    Based upon my own situation, I can tell you that serving on the ICANN
    Board is much more difficult when you have ties to the registration
    authority community in that it requires walking a very fine line.
    However, I believe that my contributions to the Board and the broader
    Internet community are beneficial.

    I know that some registrars have a position that no employee of a
    registry and/or registrar should serve on the ICANN Board. I personally
    do not share this overly restrictive view because it would currently
    prohibit such people as Bruce Tonkin, Tim Ruiz, Ross Rader, Paul
    Stahura, Tom Keller, Jon Nevett or other leaders within the registrar
    community from ever serving on the ICANN Board.  I think these
    individuals have a lot of knowledge and could make the ICANN Board a
    more effective body.
    and how to handle them :-) First let me stress that these are my own
    personal comments. Obviously Vint will be updating his conflict of
    interest statement, and Hagen Hultsch as the Chair of the Board
    Conflicts Committee will be reviewing it in conjunction with the
    Conflicts Committee of which I also serve.

    My personal viewpoint, based upon what I currently know, is that it is
    possible that Vint may have to abstain in the future from some votes
    that come before the board.  However, even if that should be the case, I
    do not believe it would detract from the institutional knowledge,
    visionary guidance, and leadership that Vint provides to the Board and
    the ICANN community. Under the current conflicts policy, as well as the
    proposed modified conflicts policy discussed in Luxemburg, there are
    adequate mechanisms in place to handle these situations. It is important
    to realize that ICANN by its very nature is designed to have
    participants with a vested interest in ICANN, i.e. registrars, gTLD
    registries, ccTLDs registries, RIRs, etc. The important focus is the
    need for a series of checks and balances to ensure that an individual is
    not misusing his position within the ICANN structure (Board, staff,
    consultant, Supporting Organization, Council, etc) for financial gain.

    Although I have seen several comments about Google being a registrar, I
    am not aware if Google is operational. What jumped out at me first was
    Google's role in the traffic aggregation market, i.e. SiteFinder,
    deleted domain names, etc. Based upon what I know of the industry they
    are one of the organizations that spend a lot of money in this area.
    Please correct me if I am wrong.

    So I guess what I am trying to say is that it is premature to speculate
    about any potential conflicts until Vint updates his conflict statement.
    Based upon my own situation, I can tell you that serving on the ICANN
    Board is much more difficult when you have ties to the registration
    authority community in that it requires walking a very fine line.
    However, I believe that my contributions to the Board and the broader
    Internet community are beneficial.

    I know that some registrars have a position that no employee of a
    registry and/or registrar should serve on the ICANN Board. I personally
    do not share this overly restrictive view because it would currently
    prohibit such people as Bruce Tonkin, Tim Ruiz, Ross Rader, Paul
    Stahura, Tom Keller, Jon Nevett or other leaders within the registrar
    community from ever serving on the ICANN Board.  I think these
    individuals have a lot of knowledge and could make the ICANN Board a
    more effective body.
    [ 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