No Such Weblog

This week-end, there were various indications of growing frustration. One example for that frustration was an exchange between ICANN board member Jonathan Cohen, Michael Froomkin, and ICANN's external counsel Joe Sims.

Other postings worth your attention: Roberto Gaetano on ICANN funding for the GAC, and on possible reasons for being frustrated with participation in ICANN. A follow-up to the latter one came from Bret Fausett. Writes Fausett: The fact that people have stuck around longer than less sentient animals would have under similar circumstances is a testament to their goodwill, their desire to assist ICANN (not tear it down), and the belief in the importance of ICANN's mission.

As C|Net reports on August 9, that is, three days after the FTC investigation against Verisign became public, Verisign [is] playing by the rules. I'm impressed. Interestingly, the C|Net article is about the Annual Independent Neutrality Audit, which was published in late June.

An abcNEWS article, titled Can ICANN?, discusses various aspects of ICANN reform, with Michael Froomkin as one of their interview partners. Ross Rader has already commented on Froomkin's remark that meetings outside the US mean less transparency. What is more interesting (thanks to A.S. for the heads-up!) is the remark on a possible "re-bid" of ICANN's functions when the MoU expires in September: It isn't an attractive problem [for Commerce] to fix. Now, dear friends from the American NGO community, where are your contingency plans just in case ICANN should continue to exist? Where's the blueprint for a consumer interests' constituency? Quite frankly, I agree with much of the recent criticism against ICANN. But I'm missing contributions from certain groups on ICANN's actual business.

The CDT's Rob Courtney writes on the GA list: This afternoon, CDT transmitted the following letter to Asst. Sec. Nancy Victory and Robin Layton at the Department of Commerce. The letter urges Commerce to commit to adding new provisions to the ICANN MOU, including provisions to create meaningful limits on ICANN's authorities, establish accountability mechanisms, and provide representation. The letter also urges that the MOU's duration be short, not to exceed one year, and that ICANN submit bi-annual public reports on its progress to Commerce and the GAC.

The letter is available from CDT's web site.