ICANN and the Public interest

[Elsa S]

Thanks for sharing Milton!

ICANN seems adamant about using the terms on a context to context basis
given the new proposed path forward, also shared in two webinars this month.

Even though NCSG in the past year as far as I’ve seen, has been pushing for
not using the word from the start, it seems we might have to actively work
on mitigating the risk of its use in a more structurally biased way.

I’m keeping an eye out for any developments on the consultation phase (even
though I would have preferred a formal public comment phase instead), but
would also invite that we all have a discussion about the proposed way
forward by ICANN, more meticulously and collectively.

Best,

Elsa
—

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:59 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> I was reading some scholarly literature about public service broadcasting
> and came across this statement from a GigaNet colleague, Yik Chin:
>
>
>
> “The Constitution of the PRC indeed speaks the language of the Public
> Interest (PI), and the term regularly appears in legal provisions without
> definition. There have been no juridical interpretations of ‘PI’, either.
> This ambiguity gives discretionary power to the authorities to interpret
> ‘PI’ in ways that invade and deprive individuals of their rights. Chin, Y.C
> 2012.
>
>
>
> Food for thought
>
>
>
> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>
> School of Public Policy
>
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
>
>
-- 
--

Elsa Saade
Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20190923/4d3942c5/attachment.htm>