Important blog post about the ICANN Accountability CCWG

[Carlos Raúl G.]

Dear Milton!

It really depends Milton => I'm assuming that we are talking about "a" common, the DNS, to be managed by a private agent, ICANN (no a regulator) In that case we are already talking about a collective interest.

Further I'm assuming that a Board decision "may" be based on an assumption of PI that may diverge from the communities assumption of what the PI is in case of this collective resource.

Where do we go from there? Who do we call if there is no NTIA contract anymore? 

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
+506 8837 7176 (New Number)
Enviado desde mi iPhone

> El dic 27, 2014, a las 9:53 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> escribió:
> 
> I totally reject that presumption.
>  
> All behavior is private. Only individuals or small coordinated groups act and behave. The public interest cannot be much different from an aggregation of a lot of people’s private interests. The idea that we are all devils individually but collectively become angels is a nonsense that I thought had died with various forms of totalitarianism.
>  
> Again I think it is much better to talk about these problems in the context of rights. If a specific private actor does something that violates one or more peoples rights then there is a regulatory problem.
>  
> From: Carlos Raúl G. [mailto:crg at isoc-cr.org] 
> 
> All regulatory statutes command to pursue the "public interest", because they presume that private behavior, unregulated, will diverge from the public interest. 
>  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20141227/be7c43a0/attachment.htm>