Vint Cerf has a different model
Date: Thursday March 30 2006, @12:05PM
Topic: The Big Picture

ehasbrouck writes "From the transcript of the first half of the public forum in Wellington:

Bret Fausett: ...Whether you are right or I am right about the merits of .com, I think we ought to use what I am hearing in the hallways to make it better. Because frankly, if we can't figure out how to represent the public interest better, there are other organizations that start to look like they might be able to do that.

Vint Cerf: Just keep in mind that a multistakeholder organizations have more than just public interest to represent. Is that a fair observation, Bret?

Bret Fausett: I think in an organization like ICANN, public interest is the overriding interest that should be represented.

Vint Cerf: We should talk about that because I have a different model.

Bret Fausett: Then I think that your different model and my model of the public interest being paramount might be exactly at the source of the tensions that we are feeling.

Vint Cerf: See you over a pinot noir.

"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Vint Cerf has a different model | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 10 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.
He Who Has the Gold Rules
by michael (froomkin@lawUNSPAM.tm) on Thursday March 30 2006, @12:11PM (#16666)
User #4 Info | http://www.discourse.net/
The trouble with ICANN, right from the start, was that so many people bought into the "stakeholder" model which says people spending a lot of money should get more consideration for their views (because they are bigger 'stakeholders', or have a bigger 'stake').

Why more people were not angry at this crony corporatism from the start is one of the many mysteries of this whole saga.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Time to re-incorporate?
by KarlAuerbach on Thursday March 30 2006, @02:51PM (#16667)
User #3243 Info | http://www.cavebear.com/
Perhaps Vint has not realized the import of his statement:

If ICANN is, in fact, some sort of industrial "multi-stakeholder" body then it is no longer appropriate for ICANN to remain incorporated as either a California "public benefit" corporation or receive a US Federal exemption under the terms of 501(c)(3).
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.




  • This article comes from ICANNWatch
    http://www.icannwatch.org/

    The URL for this story is:
    http://www.icannwatch.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/30/215232