IP: Two replies to me noted -- ICANN and what it is

[David Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>]

>From: chris@eXtraActive.net
>Subject: Re: IP: Re: ICANN and what it is
>To: farber@cis.upenn.edu
>Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 17:39:44 GMT
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>
>
>hi dave,
>
>i was under the impression that in fact ICANN had first-rate public
>relations; ogilvy is their firm.  they seem to be doing a great job with
>the press; i've read surprisingly little criticism of ICANN recently (since
>the congressional hearings that turned into an NSI roast) - mostly it's
>been commentary on ICANN's progress which is implicitly good press, giving
>ICANN legitimacy.
>
>what little criticism i have heard recently is that ICANN is enacting
>policy that extends beyond it's charter, and they are creating this policy
>with little accountability, transparency, and most important of all -
>consensus.  last week there were a few articles (like the one in the
>industry standard listed below) saying ICANN was pushing through
>intellectual property policies, and the makers of these policies were
>overwhelmingly big business and trademark lawyers - not the individuals,
>small businesses and non-commercial organizations that own most of the
>domains out there.
>
>the implication is that the big guys are moving fast using ICANN as a
>vehicle to tilt domain disputes in their favor, so that the rules are in
>place before the little guys have a voice.  regardless of whether or not
>ICANN is called an oversight board, i think that awareness of these issues
>and what they could mean at the personal level is shockingly low amongst
>general internet users, many of whom have registered domain names.
>
>chris
>
>--
>chris maroney
>eXtraActive, Inc
>
>Industry Standard:  Controversy Follows ICANN to Chile (sorry for the long
>url)
>
>http://www.idg.net/idg_frames/english/content.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fww 
>w.thestandard.net%2Farticles%2Fdisplay%2F0%2C1449%2C6080%2C00.html%3Fh 
>ome.tf&return



Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 12:18:22 -0400
To: farber@cis.upenn.edu, jerri@nytimes.com
From: Gordon Cook <cook@cookreport.com>
Subject: Re: IP: ICANN and what it is

for IP please

Calling ICANN the Internet's Oversight Board was not a 
'misconception'.  It was in fact an accurate analysis by Jerri 
Claussing of the New York Times. Claussing has been watching what 
they do as well as what they say they are doing.

ICANN's protestations aside, anyone who has followed this carefully 
is well aware that ICANN is creating an extensive framework for 
Internet policy oversight.  That ICANN is so enormously sensitive 
about this speaks volumes about their desire to manipulate public 
opinion in such a way that understanding of where they are going does 
not arrive until it is too late.  The sad story is that if you read 
only their point of view, they look reasonable.  The sadder story is 
that it is working as the Markle Foundation, in all innocence, now 
seems to be interested in assisting them with their "democratic" 
goals.  The saddest point of all is that if you do not spending an 
inordinate amount of time following the complexities of ICANN 's 
actions, you will never understand why many of us are extremely upset 
with them.