more on Icann's level of discourse Re: [IP] more on ICANN response to Lauren Weinstein's Wired article on ICANN

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

The following is from The Cook Report  pages 91-92 of the november -december
2002 

The editor Gordon Cook


------ Forwarded Message
From: Gordon Cook <cook () cookreport com>



Editor: What follows is an outburst by Canadian Jonathan Cohen an
intellectual property attorney and ICANN Board Member.  Cohen is a
typical example of the closed minded crowd that has been shuttled
onto a rubber-stamp Board by the ICANN Clique.  Mary Hewitt is
ICANN's PR flak.   In the email that Cohen responds to below she has
apparently distributed the New Architect Editorial with ICANN.  For
the original see 
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200208/msg0007
0.html


From: Mary Hewitt <[mailto:hewitt () icann org]> Sent: Friday, August 16,
2002 2:33 PM To: hewitt () icann org Subject: new architect - ICANN of
worms

"ICANN of Worms The Internet governing body is short on answers and
out of time" By Christopher Null New Architect September 2002

Even if you're a casual New Architect reader, you've likely noticed
that a new mug is staring out at you from above these words. I'm
pleased to inherit the leadership of the magazine from my esteemed
colleague Amit Asaravala. And while I'm not big on introductions, a
few words of prologue seem in order, if for no other reason than to
convince you that this magazine is in good hands.

My background includes editorial stints at Smart Business and LAN
Times magazines, and before that, I put in several years in software
development and IT management. I have an MBA from The University of
Texas at Austin (and was born and raised in Houston), but speak with
no trace of a southern accent.

I've been steeped in the Internet since the only "browser war" was
between you and your copy of Mosaic. On a dare, I launched the movie
review Web site FilmCritic.com in 1995, and much to my astonishment,
the site is still kicking today. From my catbird seat, I get to
observe the Internet as it impacts everythingÐbusiness,
entertainment, pop culture, and mainstream society. It's the perfect
vantage point for leading New Architect into a new era, one in which
technology is no longer a curiosity, but a vital part of any thriving
enterprise.

I hope you continue to enjoy New Architect as it evolves. I encourage
you to write me with your ideas, concerns, and suggestions, or just
to say hello."

"If any Internet issue demands your immediate attention, it's the
battle that's being waged over the future of the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Of course, you can be
forgiven for ignoring the protracted skirmishÐit is epic in its scope
and extremely complex. In case you haven't been following the news,
here's a sampling of recent ICANN developments.

Karl Auerbach, an ICANN director, sued to inspect the corporate
records of his own organization. His case is still pending.

Congress opened a bitter inquest regarding the group, demanding
accountability and a definition of ICANN's actual responsibilities.
Congress is even threatening not to renew the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) that gives ICANN a license to operate.

Former chairwoman and once-ardent defender of ICANN Esther Dyson
pronounced the current organization "nothing but juvenile" and "a
real cesspool."

Critics claim the group has too much power. Directors claim it has no
power at all. Supporters say the group is hampered by its attempts to
appease too many stakeholders. Critics say it successfully caters to
the needs of no one.

And of course, critics also say that the organization's semi-secret
meetings breed distrust and a lack of accountability. Supporters moan
that all the group does is meet and talk endlessly, never making
decisions or putting its lengthy proposals into action. When the
group does get down to business, we end up with new TLDs like
".aero," ".museum," and ".coop." If I ever visit a ".coop" (reserved
for co-operatives) in my life, I'll be shockedÐthough the poultry
industry really needs to hop on chicken.coop.

Even the ".name" TLD, which was supposed to be limited to personal
firstname.lastname.name URLs, already has become corrupted beyond
belief. Users have registered thousands of bogus sites, from
greenbay.packers.name to sharper.image.name to santa.santa.name.

But annoying TLD issues are almost beside the point. The big question
is what's going to happen when the bloated, power-mad organization
does something that can't be cleaned up so easily. ICANN has only
been around since 1998, and for almost a quarter of that time, it's
been mired in "reform." The current operating budget is about triple
the estimate of the original MOU (those jaunts to Ghana don't come
cheap!).

At a mere 7,000 words, the latest ICANN reform document proposes a
blistering series of changes, full of non-voting liaisons and
advisory committees. Not surprisingly, Internet discussion has now
centered on whether to scrap the whole thing and start from scratch.
At this point, it isn't such a bad idea. Why not socialize the ICANN
experiment? As loathsome as it sounds, even the IRS runs better than
this."

From: Jonathan Cohen <[mailto:jcohen () shapirocohen com]>
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 11:58 AM
To: hewitt () icann org Subject:
RE: new architect - ICANN of worms

What a biased, superficial, distorted out of context, sensationalist
piece of crap. The STAR needs this man to write copy for "Space Alien
impregnates Pop Singer Madonna"..except even that may require some
reasonable research and ..."Facts".. where did he get that MBA? and
what does the B stand for?

Jonathan

PS please feel free to forward my comments to Mr.Null and Void. Or
the Board if they want a chuckle. God its a hoot being a Volunteer in
Cyber-Hell!!

Editor:  Still full of himself, Cohen wrote the DNSO General Assembly
list at just after 3 PM on August 16.

"And will those who disagree stop villifying, name calling,
cheap-shotting because they don't get their way. Will people from
'some' country stop invoking its world view on every aspect of ICANN
and the Internet. Will those who don't like directions or decisions
of ICANN stop whining to Congress or the DOC, will they take the time
to check their facts? Bob Dylan said it in a song a long time ago
....."try spending a day in our shoes",as VOLUNTEERS, at considerable
personal cost in time, energy and MONEY!! Try listening to the push
and pull from every direction, the criticism, the Politics, the
Rhetoric, name calling AND WORSE, while you try to do the Best Job
you can. No one on the Board expects sympathy or "flowers"... But it
would sure be refreshing to get some 'Balance' and some decent
debate, where if you don't win you shake hands and try again
later...But maybe that's ''culturally biased'' see you around the
"Ranch"

Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 15:48:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Froomkin -
U.Miami School of Law <froomkin () law miami edu> To: Jonathan Cohen
<jcohen () shapirocohen com> <[cc's were included in the original message]>

I see you do have time to send email. Well then, allow me to check facts:

Is it true as alleged on the GA list that the ITU was willing to pick
up the charges needed to support the GAC, but ICANN chose to pay
US$75,000 itself...in the absence of any need or contractual
obligation to do so?

And why exactly should I be denied my right to petition congress and
the executive for a redress of grievances? When it's the actions of
the US government that empower ICANN? And it's ICANN which has chosen
to disenfranchise me. I certainly have no vote on anything ICANN
does, and you are planning to put the last nail in that coffin in
October. I should sit quietly and take my medicine?

Incidentally, I find your comment that we should try to imagine what
it is like to be in your shoes especially insulting, as it is your
decisions which ensure that no one representing me will ever get to
do exactly that. And of course, there's no 'try again later' once
you've been shut out completely of the voting power. In fact, we had
about 3 tries on getting user representation, all rejected by the
ICANN board. That's a lot of tries already.

My cultural bias is in favor of representative structures and strict
accountability. What's yours?

Editor: The next morning August 17, as part of the same mail list
conversation, Sims wrote to Froomkin and cc'ed the mail list of the
Domain Name Support Organization General Assembly.  Now it is easy to
imagine that Joe Sims simply snapped given how Michael Froomkin, in
his writings at least, has done probably more than any other person
to focus the thinking of those of us who take the time to look at how
ICANN really operates as opposed to what ICANN claims to do.  While
we can see ICANN's manipulations, Froomkin has through his written
and legal analysis of what the ICANN clique has done has written the
Handbook that explains with great clarity why we ignore these people
at our peril.  He has made Joe Sim's prevarications much harder for
Sims to get away with.  Joe is mad and he's not going to take it
anymore.  Read on:

"Your "cultural bias," as best I can tell, is to try to get your 15
minutes of fame by becoming the Cassandra of ICANN, apparently hoping
to rescue an otherwise unimpressive career by finding a niche where
you can be perceived as the expert. And I have to admit that you have
been pretty successful at that goal -- at least in the sense that you
do get lots of attention, and invitations to testify, and calls from
reporters. Is it exciting? Of course, there is one little thing: it
does not appear that your constant criticism has much impact, on
anything. Maybe that is because there are lots of other people, many
of whom are also critical of some aspects of ICANN, who instead of
just posting rants on the GA list and exercising their ego to run a
webpage, actually dig in and work at trying to make ICANN more
effective; those people do make progress in trying to shape ICANN
more to their liking, because they invest the elbow grease it takes
to get that done. Of course, you sneer at these folks as
"collaborators," but the real sneers here from serious people are
reserved for folks like you, who have no skin in the game, no
willingness to invest even a little positive effort, and who insist
that their positions are written on tablets and not subject to
compromise. Junk like the stuff you post is exactly the reason why
more people do not participate in this or other similar forums,
because it is a waste of time. Of course, perhaps the worst thing
from your point would be to actually succeed, since there would no
longer be an excuse to pontificate on such weighty issues. An advance
warning: I am not going to engage in a continuing debate with you or
your fellow travelers on this point, so fire away all you want; you
won't get a response. But your attack on Jon, who actually went to
the (apparently useless) trouble to try to engage in a dialogue, has
left me with an irresistible compulsion to point out that, despite
all the noise generated by Froomkin Inc., there is no "there" there.
Have a good day."

Joe Sims
Jones Day Reavis & Pogue
51 Louisiana Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Direct Phone:  1.202.879.3863
Direct Fax:  1.202.626.1747
Mobile Phone:  1.703.629.3963


-- 
========================================================
The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA (609)
882-2572 (phone & fax) cook () cookreport com  Subscription info &
prices at   http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtml    Summary of
content for 10 years at http://cookreport.com/past_issues.shtml  Info
on Economics of Peering, Transit & IXs
November - December 118 pages available at
http://cookreport.com/11.08-09.shtml
========================================================

------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/