ICANN President & CEO Busy Rearranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic

ICANN President & CEO busy rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic:

I’ve made some small changes to the #ICANN org Executive Team, a promotion and a new role. Read more in my blog: https://t.co/Z0Q9Cj6gkr

— ICANN President (@icann_president) October 4, 2016

This is the problem when the ICANN Board of Directors replaced former ICANN President & CEO Fadi Chehade (who quit in March, 2016, 3½ years into a 5-year contract), with a complete stranger to ICANN, Goran Marby of Sweden, who had no prior experience in any aspect of ICANN, nor any of its three "communities"--domain names, numbers (RIRs), protocols (IETF).

Marby, who started as ICANN President & CEO in May of this year, was previously Director-General of the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority. Shortly after his appointment was announced in February, 2016, the ICANN Board members, and other ICANN insiders, appeared unaware and surprised when Domain Mondo pointed to reports out of Sweden indicating Marby's temperament and leadership style might be incompatible with ICANN's collaborative, multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance, resulting in a press conference--MP3 audio archived here and here--in which a Bloomberg BNA reporter asked Marby (@3:45 in the audio) about one of those reports, quoting a Swedish telecom operator that Marby's style was "lacking in transparency," and "threatening."

Perhaps that is why Marby has kept a low profile at ICANN but for his recent appearance before U.S. Senator Ted Cruz's (R-TX) recent Subcommittee Hearing in Washington, D.C., (video), where Marby, under grilling by Cruz, looked like a "deer caught in the headlights."

Clearly, it will take Marby at least a year, if not two, before he is no longer "wet behind the ears" when it comes to being President & CEO of ICANN. Unfortunately, that has given ICANN insiders, who are part of the organization's culture problem, ample time to indoctrinate Marby, who may be completely unaware of ICANN's systemic dysfunction and other problems, including the fact that it was the "ICANN community" alone (not NTIA, ICANN Board members, management or staff), who insisted on the accountability component of the IANA stewardship transition.

This may be evident in Marby's list of his ICANN Executive Team Members as of October 4, 2016, see list below with asterisks marking members who are a known *crony of former ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé & ICANN GDD President Akram Atallah. Atallah reportedly got his "old friend" Chehadé the CEO job at ICANN, and in turn, was appointed by Chehadé to the second-highest paying position at ICANN which provides Atallah a total annual compensation + benefits package approaching $1,000,000 in value--who says you can't "profit" from a "non-profit" corporation--move over Bill and Hillary!

ICANN Executive Team Members (Oct 4, 2016):

Göran Marby; *Akram Atallah; *Allen Grogan; *Ashwin Rangan; David Conrad; Diane Schroeder; Duncan Burns; John Jeffrey; Sally Costerton; *Susanna Bennett; Tarek Kamel; Theresa Swinehart; Xavier Calvez.

This list contains many of the same ICANN team members in charge when the ICANN community expressed such dissatisfaction with ICANN leadership and insisted on the ICANN accountability components now known as Work Stream 1 (WS1) and Work Stream 2 (WS2). Compounding the problem, the ICANN Board of Directors has been dysfunctional and failed to properly oversee ICANN management and staff, leading to such embarrassments as the IRP Declarations in the DotConnectAfrica Trust (DCA Trust) and Dot Registry cases.

Maybe ICANN wasn't really ready for the IANA transition.

See also ICANN Management Organization Chart 01Oct2016: management-org-01oct16-en.pdf (pdf) embed below:


feedback & comments via twitter @DomainMondo
Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

News Review: ICANN, IANA Transition Plan, NTIA, and U.S. Congress

"... the U.S. Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) today announces its intent to transition key Internet domain name functions to the global multistakeholder community ..."-- NTIA, March 14, 2014

Domain Mondo's review of the past week--and a look ahead to the coming week--

ICANN55 in Marrakech concluded Thursday, March 10th, after the ICANN Board of Directors, a year behind schedule, finally transmitted to NTIA the IANA Stewardship Transition Plan developed in response to the NTIA announcement of March 2014. Read more on Domain Mondo here and here.

Don't believe the hype you may have read or heard from ICANN and NTIA, or their various sycophants. Not only are both touting false narratives in support of the Plan, but both are equally to blame for a flawed transition process which resulted in a plan that fails to address the fundamental, systemic, and structural problems of ICANN. Not only are Work Stream 1 accountability recommendations "untested, unproven, and yet to be implemented" but some fundamental issues were deferred such as ICANN's jurisdiction which will be addressed in work stream 2 (WS2). Will ICANN, a California corporation, be the first U.S. non-profit corporate inversion--not for tax benefits but for political expedience--reincorporating and relocating to Beijing or Geneva or Brussels in the future? No one knows. U.S. jurisdiction is not a fundamental bylaw. Jurisdiction could be changed to any other nation in the future, totalitarian or otherwise. Even the accountability of ICANN's AC/SOs (advisory committees and supporting organizations) to the wider global internet community was deferred to Work Stream 2, meaning these issues will be dealt with sometime in the future. When, if ever, domain name registrants and internet users, who are the core of the global multistakeholder community, might see real accountability from ICANN and its "ICANN community" is unknown, but don't hold your breath!

Remember, NTIA in its announcement of March 14, 2014, failed to even mention, much less require, improvements in ICANN's accountability to either the ICANN community or the global multistakeholder community (and there is a difference, although NTIA acts as if there isn't). It wasn't until ICANN's own "ICANN community" (mostly lobbyists and special interests) vociferously objected, that NTIA agreed and forced ICANN--the California corporation--to add ICANN's accountability to its own "ICANN community" as a necessary component of the IANA transition plan.

Also, not all Chartering organizations actually approved the CCWG Accountability proposal, and of those that did, many have members who expressed concerns or reservations--for example, note one slide shown at an ICANN55 ccNSO session--

One View of the Strengths & Weaknesses of the CCWG Accountability WS1 Proposal

Nevertheless, it is what it is. And the truth is, there isn't, at present, a better option B available other than to maintain the status quo which is unacceptable to most other governments in the world. Will the Plan be approved and current U.S. government oversight end on September 30, 2016? Short answer: Yes, unless Republicans insist on deferral until after a new administration takes office in January, 2017. We may know more this week after the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee's Communications and Technology Subcommittee holds its IANA transition hearing on March 17th. Stay tuned.

Of course, there is always the possibility that Congress--both Democrats and Republicans--realizes it is in the best interests of not only the American people, but also the global internet community, to insist upon the completion and implementation and subsequent evaluation of both Work Stream 1 (WS1) and Work Stream 2 (WS2) accountability mechanisms, and whether they are actually effective and working, and then decide whether ending U.S. oversight is appropriate and in the best interests of both the American people and the global internet community.

See also on Domain Mondo:

• How ICANN and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé Evade Accountability
• GAC Members [and other CCWG Members] Minority [Dissenting] Statements on ICANN Accountability WS1 Proposal

Most popular articles at DomainMondo.com this past week (# of pageviews Sun-Sat):

1. ICANN a Steward? LOL! This Is How ICANN Wastes Registrants' Money
2. Forty Tech Companies Have Come to Apple's Encryption Defense (videos)
3. News Review: ICANN55, IANA Transition, New gTLDs, dot AFRICA
4. ICANN55: IANA Transition Plan, Sexual Harrassment, ICANN New gTLDs
5. Could The CIA Have Stopped The 9/11 Hijackers? New Yorker New Media

Final Note: Don't miss Domain Mondo's post yesterday: Consumer Trust In New gTLD Domains Is Getting Worse says NCC Group - more Bad News for ICANN's new gTLDs

Have a great week!

-- John Poole, Editor, Domain Mondo


Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Total ICANN Tab for IANA Stewardship Transition? US$31+ Million!

Total ICANN Tab for IANA Stewardship Transition (including CCWG-Accountability) per Board Director Cherine Chalaby (see further below): "US$25 million in FY15 and FY16 and a further potential expenditure of US$6-9 million in FY17."

Better hope ICANN is a better steward of the IANA functions than it is of the fees paid by domain name registrants (generally US$.25 per gTLD domain name per year) which provide most of the funding for ICANN, including ICANN's IANA Stewardship Transition--and there isn't even a Registrants Stakeholder Lobby Group in ICANN! (did someone say taxation without representation?)--

From the CCWG-Accountability public mail list (March 1, 2016, emphasis added):

Dear Colleagues,
Please find below an update from the Board Finance Committee on a proposed way forward regarding the management of the [IANA] Transition Project costs. This is a particularly timely contribution to our F2F meeting [Friday, March 4th] in Marrakech. We have specifically invited the Finance Committee members to attend the part of our meeting where we plan to discuss this topic.
Best and safe travels to all,
Mathieu Weill (CCWG Co-Chair)

From Cherine Chalaby [ICANN Board Member] Transition and Accountability Cost Next Step:

Dear CCWG and CWG co-chairs,
Further to our call on 9 February 2016 to discuss the cost of the Transition and Accountability work, I have had follow-up calls with the leaders of the SO/AC Chartering Organisations, and I am pleased to report to you that we have reached an agreement on a way forward.

Historical Perspective
Historically, it has not been not part of the multi-stakeholder model to have any one person or even a small group given the authority to make decisions, including on costs. Furthermore, the SOs/ACs have not been able to obtain information about detailed costs for their work, meetings, staff time, etc. Nevertheless, given the large sums of money involved:

USD 25 millions in FY15 and FY16 and a further potential expenditure of USD 6-9 million in FY17, it would be good practice to produce reliable estimates and to manage costs going forward. This would represent a change of culture for the ICANN community. Therefore, it would be best to adopt a two-step approach in order to get the gradual buy-in of the community. Step 1 entails developing reliable estimates, and Step 2 entails deciding how best to manage cost.

Agreement on Step1 - Developing Reliable Estimates (4-6 weeks)
The leaders of the SO/AC Chartering Organizations agreed that it is imperative to get a good handle and clarity on past and future expenditures. First we must undertake an in-depth analysis of past expenditures in FY15 and FY16 (up to Marrakech) and understand where and how money was spent. From what we will learn, we should be in a position to estimate future expenditures for the remainder of FY16 (from Marrakech to end of Financial Year in June), and for all of FY17. We must also identify potential problem areas and develop ways to address them, one-by-one. With such plans, we can then present to the CCWG and CWG co-chairs what is likely possible and what is likely to be problematic in terms of cost control mechanisms.

We agreed that Step1 should be undertaken, on a pilot basis, by a small dedicated Project Cost Support Team (PCST) and should not last more than 4-6 weeks. The PCST will consist of four members: a project manager, a legal manager, a financial planner and a project administrator. The ICANN CEO will be responsible for selecting these individuals. The desired selection criteria are: competent, respected and trusted by the community, familiarity with ICANN transition and Accountability work and available on a full-time basis for 4-6 weeks. ICANN will pay for the PCST. The leaders of the SO/AC Chartering Organisations as well as the CCWG and CWG co-chairs will be informed of the cost of the PCST.

The PCST is neither a decision making nor a management team. The PCST is a support function to the CCWG and CWG co-chairs. It must therefore coordinate closely with the co-chairs while undertaking Step1.

Given that the Draft FY17 Budget will be posted on 5 March 2016, a placeholder of USD 6-9 millions has been included in the draft budget for Transition and Accountability work in FY17. This figure will be adjusted once the PCST completes Step 1. It is therefore desirable to start Step1 as soon as possible.

Next Call
It was agreed that we should set up a call once Step1 is completed (around mid to end April) to review the findings of the PCST and to agree collectively on how best to manage cost going forward (Step 2).

I sincerely hope that you are supportive of the pilot work we agreed to undertake. Please do not hesitate to ask me any questions.
Best regards,
Cherine

More information (source: ICANN): IANA Stewardship Transition Project Costs


Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Is ICANN's IANA Stewardship Transition Plan DOA Washington DC? (video)

Is the IANA Stewardship Transition Plan DOA [Dead on Arrival] in Washington? On Tuesday, February 23, 2016, Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker (NTIA is an agency of the Commerce Department) testified in a budget hearing before the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science, and was asked specifically, by Subcommittee Chairman John Culberson, if she understood Congress had prohibited any effort towards an IANA stewardship transition--watch the relevant portion of that testimony below (27:20-32:53)--

Video above starts at 27:20, and ends at 32:53. Hearing: Department of Commerce Budget - The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science holds a hearing to review the FY 2017 budget request for the U.S. Department of Commerce. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker testifies. (Streamed live Feb 23, 2016) (EventID=104476).

Excerpt:

Chairman John Culberson: "You recognize we've prohibited any effort to move to such a [IANA stewardship] transition?"

Secretary Pritzker: "I understand the language which has been put in appropriations, and so what we are going to do is receive a plan and then we will talk to you about it."

It is now expected that the ICANN Board of Directors will deliver, in March, 2016, to NTIA, the IANA Stewardship Transition Plan developed in response to the NTIA, March, 2014, announcement.

For background and further information see on Domain Mondo:

• IANA Stewardship Transition, New ICANN CCWG Accountability Timeline
• US Senators Cruz, Lankford & Lee Demand Answers From ICANN CEO
• US Congressman Tells ICANN CEO To 'Abandon' IANA Transition
• After Wuzhen, Should ICANN President & CEO Fadi Chehade Be Fired?
• How ICANN and ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé Evade Accountability

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

US Congressman Tells ICANN CEO To 'Abandon' IANA Transition

UPDATE: ICANN President & CEO Fadi Chehade has replied to Congressman Duffy by letter (pdf) dated February 11, 2016, embedded below:

U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy

In a letter (pdf) to ICANN President & CEO, Fadi Chehadé, dated January 13, 2016, U.S. Congressman Sean P. Duffy (Rep, Wisconsin 7th District), expressed his displeasure with the ICANN CEO's recent interview on NPR about the IANA stewardship transition proposal being prepared by ICANN for submittal to the U.S. government (U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIA). Congressman Duffy notes in his letter "the widespread opposition in Congress to your efforts" and concluded his letter (emphasis added):

"I urge you to abandon your plans to weaken the Internet for users in the United States and around the world. The Commerce Department has no money to consider your proposal and I will continue to do everything in my power to ensure that it never does." --Congressman Duffy, January 13, 2016 Letter to ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé 

Full text:

Congressman Duffy has an interesting biography, according to Wikipedia--

"... Duffy started log rolling at age five and speed climbing (sprinting up 60 and 90 foot poles) at 13. He holds two speed-climbing titles. Television career--Duffy has been an ESPN color commentator for televised competitions and in 2003 appeared as both a competitor and commentator on ESPN's Great Outdoor Games. He was named Badger State Games Honorary Athlete of the 2004 Winter Games. In 1997, Duffy appeared on The Real World: Boston, the sixth season of the MTV reality television show, and on Road Rules: All Stars in 1998, where he met his future wife Rachel. Duffy later appeared on Real World/Road Rules Challenge: Battle of the Seasons, which aired in 2002. Both appeared in a filmed segment on 2008's The Real World Awards Bash, while Duffy served as district attorney ..." 

Sounds like he could give the real Donald J. Trump a run for his money!  Caveat ICANN!

As for the IANA Transition timetable, here's the latest (Feb 2, 2016) from the CCWG Co-Chairs:

Leading into Marrakech: An Update from the CCWG-Accountability co-Chairs - ICANN: "... Our goal is to distribute the supplemental report to our Chartering Organizations in time for consideration and approval on all Work Stream 1 Recommendations at ICANN55 [March 5-10, 2016] in Marrakech. Keeping in mind the working methods for the various Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees, we ask that this be into account as the Chartering Organizations plan their discussions and schedules leading into and during ICANN55..."


Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

Why Did ICANN Become a Member of Trademark Lobbyist Group INTA?

"The International Trademark Association (INTA) is the global association of trademark owners and professionals ... INTA undertakes advocacy work throughout the world ..." -- from the INTA website

" . . . . you deny the existence of special interest lobbies in ICANN? Tell you what. Get yourself to an ICANN meeting, let me know if it is London, Los Angeles, or any other one, and I will give you a personal guided tour of special interest lobbies in ICANN. You’ll be shaking hands with so many lawyers and consultants you may want to bring some Chinese herbal lotion. If you want less dynamic and interesting evidence, take a look at this old blog post of ours, which documents ICANN staff’s catering to trademark/brand protection interests..." - Professor Milton Mueller (June 9, 2014)

Kudos to the esteemed Professor Milton Mueller of the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) for his tweets below bringing our attention again to the gross lapses of judgment, and conflicts of interest at ICANN:

Unbelievable! ICANN, governance institution for DNS, joins International Trademark Assn, a group that lobbies ICANN http://t.co/hxvOA23HzH

— Milton Mueller (@miltonmueller) October 14, 2015

#ICANN joining INTA is like the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms joining the NRA

— Milton Mueller (@miltonmueller) October 14, 2015

INTABulletin: The Voice of the International Trademark Association, July 15, 2015  Vol. 70 No. 13: Interview: Owen Smigelski, Director, ICANN Contractual Compliance: ".... It’s not always sufficient to see one comment from the IPC; it’s good to see comments from individual brand owners ... How else can INTA help? One recent development is that ICANN became an INTA member. I see that as a good opportunity for ICANN and the community to collaborate. I myself have been to three of the last four Annual Meetings. So there continues to be that relationship-building ... Another thing is that ongoing right now is a Rights Protection Mechanism (RPM) review. That’s looking at all the RPMs within ICANN, including the UDRP. There was a public comment period that ended in May and there will be a report later this year coming out, which will probably lead to additional policy and working group opportunities. I’m not sure what’s going to come out of that, but there could be modifications to the UDRP that INTA and its members should certainly be involved with. For more information on ICANN developments or to become involved with Internet and ICANN issues through INTA, contact INTA’s Senior Director of Internet Policy ..." (emphasis and IPC link added)

This boggles the mind! Trademark owners and lawyers, do you have a problem with ICANN? Why bother going through your lobbying organization, INTA, just go straight to one of INTA's outstanding new members: ICANN! Of course ICANN has a well-deserved reputation as being a "captured" organization of the well-resourced commercial organizations that dominate and control most ICANN groups, meetings, and processes, including its policy-making Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO). These "conflicts" had infected the ICANN Board of Directors to such a degree that in 2012, the U.S. Department of Commerce (NTIA) almost pulled the "IANA functions contract" completely away from ICANN:

"The Commerce Department said this month that while it was temporarily extending a contract with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers to manage the allocation of computers’ Internet protocol addresses — and the .com and .net names of Web sites associated with them — it warned the organization that it needed to tighten its rules against conflicts of interest or risk losing a central role." --The New York Times, March 18, 2012 (emphasis added)

In February of this year, ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade raised eyebrows at his speech at another lobbyist organization's meeting during ICANN 52, at Singapore:

Fadi Chehade: "... I think Adrian [Kinderis], Kurt [Pritz], and others who know this idea of the DNA Association [DNA represents the interests of the new gTLDs domain name industry] and started in some small meetings we were having at the ICANN office where I was a huge early supporter, and continued to be ... there's a brewing issue for example coming up that will affect your industry ... I'm committed to your industry without a question. I need to understand it more and spend more time in it, no question. I did realize at some point that ICANN itself is an organization needs a dedicated president that is focused on serving the industry. I asked Akram [Atallah] to abandon his COO role and be the president [of ICANN's Global Domains Division (GDD)]. We created this division to serve you. In many ways we need to pair GDD and DNA and make sure that that is very tight ..."--ICANN President and CEO Fadi Chehade, transcript of DNA meeting, February 10, 2015, video of meeting here (emphasis and links added).

Who at ICANN is serving the Public Interest? We now know that the ICANN Global Domains Division and its President, Akram Atallah, serve the new gTLDs' domain name industry and its lobbying arm, the DNA. And we also now know that ICANN is not just serving, but is a member of the trademark lobbying organization INTA. But is there ANYONE serving the PUBLIC INTEREST at ICANN? Does ICANN, its Board of Directors, or any of its officers, staff, or its "ICANN stakeholder community" even care about the Public Interest? Or is it only governments that care about, and protect, the public interest?

ICANN, and the ICANN Community, just don't get it. It is obvious that the last thing ICANN needs in order to become accountable to the Global Internet Community (global multistakeholder community) is to become a "membership" organization primarily of, for, and by the lobbyists and lobbying organizations who already have an inordinate and corrupting influence over the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.

It appears ICANN has learned nothing since 2012, and may not be ready to operate without some kind of "governmental oversight" to protect the "global public interest." At a minimum, it appears ICANN officers and staff lack the moral compass to discern and avoid obvious conflicts of interest. Is this really the appropriate time for the US government to just walk away from its oversight role and leave the global multistakeholder community (global internet community) vulnerable to exploitation by ICANN and its special interest lobbyist stakeholders? It may be time for Larry Strickling (NTIA), the US Department of Commerce and the Obama Administration to reassess their IANA Stewardship Transition announcement of March, 2014.

See also on Domain Mondo:

• A Lust for Power: Is PIMCO Like Some CCWG-Accountability Members? Oct 9, 2015
• IANA Transition, ICANN Accountability, "Has Always Been About POWER" Oct 1, 2015
• ICANN Board Does NOT Support CCWG Proposed Membership Model Sep 27, 2015
• China (CAICT) Objects to ICANN CCWG Accountability 2nd Draft Proposal Sep 24, 2015
• Only 19 of 90 Comments Support ICANN Accountability [CCWG 2nd draft] Proposal Overall Sep 22, 2015
• ICANN CCWG-Accountability Co-Chair Comments on the Public Comments Sep 15, 2015

Follow @DomainMondo

DISCLAIMER

ICANN 53, IANA Transition, Stakeholder Proposals, NTIA Questions

Ahead of the ICANN 53 meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina (pre-ICANN 53 meetings have already started in Buenos Aires) Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling, posted a review of the work thus far in the IANA Stewardship Transition, including the Cross-Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability. Strickling raised several questions (excerpt follows, emphasis added):

NTIA Administrator
Lawrence E. Strickling
(source: US government)

"Next week, hundreds of members of the Internet stakeholder community will attend the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers’ (ICANN) 53rd meeting in Argentina ... one of NTIA’s top priorities continues to be the transition of NTIA’s role related to the Internet Domain Name System. Since we announced the IANA stewardship transition in March 2014, the response of the stakeholder community has been remarkable and inspiring ... the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) must combine these proposals into a consolidated transition proposal and then seek public comment on all aspects of the plan ... [The ICG] must build a public record for us on how the three customer group submissions tie together in a manner that ensures NTIA’s criteria are met and institutionalized over the long term.

... the final submission to NTIA must include a plan to enhance ICANN’s accountability. Given that the draft proposal of the Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability will be a major focus of the discussions next week in Argentina, I would like to offer the following questions for stakeholders to consider:

• The draft proposes new or modified community empowerment tools. How can the Working Group on Accountability ensure that the creation of new organizations or tools will not interfere with the security and stability of the DNS during and after the transition? 
• Do new committees and structures create a different set of accountability questions?
• The draft proposal focuses on a membership model for community empowerment. Have other possible models been thoroughly examined, detailed, and documented? 
• Has the working group designed stress tests of the various models to address how the multistakeholder model is preserved if individual ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees opt out? 
• Similarly, has the working group developed stress tests to address the potential risk of capture and barriers to entry for new participants of the various models? 
• Further, have stress tests been considered to address potential unintended consequences of “operationalizing” groups that to date have been advisory in nature?
• The draft proposal suggests improvements to the current Independent Review Panel (IRP). The IRP has been criticized for its own lack of accountability. How does the proposal analyze and remedy existing concerns with the IRP?
• In designing a plan for improved accountability, should the working group consider what exactly is the role of the ICANN Board within the multistakeholder model? 
• Should the standard for Board action be to confirm that the community has reached consensus, and if so, what accountability mechanisms are needed to ensure the Board operates in accordance with that standard?
• The proposal is primarily focused on the accountability of the ICANN Board. Has the Working Group also considered if there need to be accountability improvements that would apply to ICANN management and staff or to the various ICANN Supporting Organizations and Advisory Committees?
• ... the ICG, the Working Group on Accountability will need to build a public record and thoroughly document how the NTIA criteria have been met and will be maintained in the future. As the plans take final shape, I hope the community starts to focus on the matter of implementation of its recommendations. Have the issues of implementation been identified and addressed in the proposal so that the community and ICANN can implement the plan as expeditiously as possible once we have reviewed and accepted it? 

... after the Buenos Aires meeting, NTIA will need to make a determination on extending its current contract with ICANN, which expires on September 30, 2015. Last month, I asked both the ICG and the Working Group on Accountability for an update on the transition planning, as well as their views on how long it will take to finalize and implement the transition plan if it were approved. Keeping in mind that the community and ICANN will need to implement all work items identified by the ICG and the Working Group on Accountability as prerequisites for the transition before the contract can end, the community’s input on timing is critical and will strongly influence how NTIA proceeds with the contract extension. I look forward to hearing from everyone in Buenos Aires. At this key juncture, it is timely to not only take stock of all the work that has occurred, but also what lies ahead." 

Read Secretary Strickling's full comments here: Stakeholder Proposals to Come Together at ICANN Meeting in Argentina.

Members of ICANN's CCWG-Accountability have started discussing and answering Strickling's (who is referred to as simply "Larry" on the CCWG mail list) questions:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/2015-June/003429.html


Follow @DomainMondo

ICANN Not Ready for IANA Stewardship Says House Judiciary Chairman

"ICANN must have accountability and transparency measures in place before such a [IANA stewardship] transition could occur and they simply are not there now."

US House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte Applauds Funding Prohibition on Internet Domain Name System Transfer - Judiciary Committee Press Release (June 3, 2015):

"House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) issued the following statement upon House passage of the Fiscal Year 2016 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Act (H.R. 2578), which includes a prohibition on funds to transition oversight over the Internet’s domain name system away from the Department of Commerce.

“The Obama Administration’s proposal to transition stewardship in overseeing the management of the Internet away from the U.S. and to an international body has kicked off high-profile debates involving many far-reaching questions that relate to the future security, stability, resiliency and integrity of the global Internet’s continued operation.

“While the proposed transition has raised numerous questions, the Administration has been less than forthcoming with answers. The Obama Administration maintains that the International [sic] Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is capable of such a transition but the evidence indicates that this is simply not the case.

“As the House Judiciary Committee’s recent hearing further demonstrated, ICANN must have accountability and transparency measures in place before such a transition could occur and they simply are not there now.

“Given all the concerns over the proposed transition of the Internet domain name system to ICANN, the funding prohibition included in the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill is necessary to halt this flawed policy from the Obama Administration.”

"Background: The House Judiciary Committee’s Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee recently held an oversight hearing in order to hear directly from a wide range of stakeholders on the status and impact of the proposed transition as well as other important issues that relate to whether ICANN is trustworthy, accountable and transparent." (emphasis added)

source: US House Judiciary Committee Press Release

see also on Domain Mondo:

• Two Congressional Hearings Wednesday on ICANN and IANA Transition
• US Hearing Wednesday: ICANN, .SUCKS, IANA Transition, Accountability
• US Congressional Hearing LIVE 2 pm, ICANN, IANA Stewardship Transition
• Video Replay of Congressional Hearings on ICANN, IANA May 13th, Tweets
• ICANN, IANA functions, Ultimate Mechanism of Accountability, A New Root

see also: ICANN: IANA Stewardship Transition | Enhancing ICANN Accountability


Follow @DomainMondo

Internet Governance, ICANN, IANA Transition, Congress .SUCKS (video)

Domain Mondo reviewer: If you can tune out everything that comes out of the mouths of Nevett, Thrush, and Hedlund--none of whom are credible, in my opinion--and focus on Mueller's and Miller's comments, this may be a video worth watching if you follow Internet governance issues. Congrats to Professor Mueller on his upcoming move to Georgia Tech (which he announces on the video). Note the following--

• New York Times (2012): "Eyebrows were raised last year when Peter Dengate Thrush, former chairman of ICANN and a fan of the domain name expansion [new gTLDs] joined a company that invests in domain names."
• Peter Dengate Thrush - ICANNWiki: "Mr. Dengate Thrush left ICANN [as Chairman of the ICANN Board of Directors] in June, 2011, about a month later it was announced that he was joining Top Level Domain Holdings Ltd. as its Executive Chairman. Top Level Domain Holdings Limited is the parent company of Minds + Machines. The move was greeted by ... allegations of misconduct, given the move from approving new gTLDs to effectively selling them... his detractors claim that he compromised ICANN's integrity via a conflict of interest." (emphasis added)

• "We think of the new TLDs almost like vanity license plates."-- Jon Nevett, Donuts co-founder and executive vice president of corporate affairs.

Thrush and Nevett--what a pair! Throw in ICANN apologist Jamie Hedlund, and you've got a real threesome there.  Couldn't the Advisory Committee to the Congressional Internet Caucus get a higher quality panel?

Internet Governance, ICANN and Congress.Sucks: Where is Control of the Internet Going? Presented by the Advisory Committee to the Congressional Internet Caucus, Washington D.C., on June 5, 2015. Internet Governance, ICANN, and Congress, the IANA stewardship transition and dot SUCKS and other new gTLDs--the panel below discussed the latest developments in the international drama that is Internet governance--the U.S. government’s decision (NTIA) to transition its historic stewardship role to the global multistakeholder community, which involves control of key Internet functions performed by ICANN, the enhancing ICANN accountability process now underway, attempts by international organizations such as the U.N. to exert greater control over Internet decisions in fora like WSIS+10, and numerous ICANN controversies such as the .SUCKS domain names controversy.

Panel of Speakers:

• Jamie Hedlund, Vice President, Strategic Programs, Global Domain Division, ICANN (Bio)
• Michelle Sara King, President & CEO, King Consults (Bio)
• Cheryl Miller, Director, International Public Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Verizon
• Milton Mueller, Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies (Bio)
• Jon Nevett, Co-Founder & EVP, Donuts Inc. (Bio)
• Peter Dengate Thrush, former Chairman of the Board of Directors, ICANN (Bio)
• Sally Shipman Wentworth, Vice President of Global Policy Development, Internet Society (Bio) moderator

NetCaucus | Internet Education Foundation


Follow @DomainMondo