Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Netizens-Digest Volume 1 Number 307
Netizens-Digest Friday, June 11 1999 Volume 01 : Number 307
Netizens Association Discussion List Digest
In this issue:
[netz] Sovereignty in government or People: ICANN creating Secret Government
[netz] Dave Farber helping to award Internet Peace Prize
[netz] ICANN Commentary Mike Roberts - ICANN is set up by U.S. govt
[netz] Positive Role of Govt & Internet Hot Potato for Foundation Funding
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 15:46:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Sovereignty in government or People: ICANN creating Secret Government
Mark Measday <measday@ibm.net> wrote:
>Michael Sondow wrote:
>Your editorializing seems at variance with the text. Surely the text
>should be read as follows, namely that, at face value, the admission
>that the Australian government and others are willing to concede
>sovereignty to an international private organization, rather than the
>treaty organization model most commonly used for international
>agreements gives strong grounds to believe that governments want to find
>an efficient compromise between the rule of law, i.e. the de facto
>nation state expression of sovereignty, and the borderless economic
>advantages of ecommerce enabled by a free internet.
The experience of many years is that once the law is ignored at
whim by those with power than very serious bad consequences are
the result, often economic collapse of one sort or other.
Governments are *not* sovereign - at least in the U.S. the people
maintain sovereignty and the government is obligated to do what
they have authority to do and not more or otherwise.
The U.S. government doesn't have the authority to create private
corporations to assume government powers. This is forbidden
by law and by the constitution as well.
This is what the U.S. is dragging other nations into, and I realize
that some other government are encouraging this as well, but it
bodes ill for nations and people around the world.
And to blame this on ecommerc and a so called "free internet"
is the height of hypocrisy.
This is setting up a situation where monopolies created by
or favored by the U.S. government and its crony's are being
enriched at the expense of the people of the world and of
the people of the U.S.
>ICANN is by no means the only forum where (liberal) governments have
>taken this position and, while it is clear that a sound bite concession
>of sovereignty is by no means as binding as one recognised under some
>international statute or treaty, it is a freely made concession
>deserving of better treatment. (I appreciate it is not clear what legal
>basis Mr Twomey has for conceding sovereignty on behalf of the
>governments for which he speaks, whether they will formalize this in
>>some manner, or whether the concession can be equally easily withdrawn).
What other forums is this being done in?
And ICANN is *not* a forum, but a power play of the grossest nature.
>The interesting thing is that these governments must grapple with the
>theoretical advantages of free trade in ideas and goods, to some degree
>implying loss of executive control and with further implications for
>cultural dilution vs economic gain. It is surely indicative that
>Australia, one of the few autarkic nations with no real land borders or
>historical cultural relationship with its neighbours should take the
>lead in this area. Calls for the disappearance of government from the
>process are misplaced.
What kind of "free trade in ideas or goods" when the central
point of control of vital functions of the Internet are being
put in hands that have no oversight and no responsibility to
anything but their own self enrichment?
>MM
>>Michael Sondow wrote:
>> Twomey gets eminent world Internet post
>> By MARK HOLLANDS
>
>> 9feb99
>
>> "I am surprised to be asked to take up the position. I see it as a
>> coup for the Australian Internet industry and current government
>> policy," he said.
>
>> [Translation: "We've got government censorship now in Australia, and
>> you're gonna have it soon everywhere else, whether you like it or
>> not!"]
>
>> The council, which has only an advisory role to ICANN, was not a
>> paper tiger, he said. "Its teeth come from the sovereignty of the
>> governments that participate on the committee. However, we do
>> concede authority to ICANN, which is an international private
>> organisation."
There is no sovereignty of governments - that is like the concept
of soverignty of kings. It is the sovereignty resides in the
people, at least in the U.S. So this is government being usurper
of that sovereignty and doing it as secret activities is therefore
no surprise.
No one knows who is on the Government Advisory Committee of
ICANN, what they do or why.
This is setting an example for governments to act in secret
abusing the people they are supposedly serving.
Secret government activity like ICANN is based on is the worse
kind of abuse of citizens around the world.
It is a backwards step to be sure in human society.
The Internet was created by open government support for scientific
work by the scientific community.
This is an effort to destroy the Internet, not to bring anything
good to anyone but the most powerful.
>
>> [Translation: "With us pushing down from the top, and the ITU
>> pushing up from underneath, we're gonna squeeze yer old Internet til
>> it busts, har-har-har."]
It sort of seems like there is a plan afoot to use ICANN to replace
the ITU. Is that what underlies all this maneuvering?
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 21:44:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Dave Farber helping to award Internet Peace Prize
Interesting that Dave Farber gets to give the keynote for the
Internet Peace Prize award - guess one gets rewarded for helping
to create and give his blessings to ICANN.
Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
>The weather is nice now. Rained yesterday but sunny and cool.
>GG and I are taking advantage of the weather and we had dinner
>two nights ago in a small restaurant near the Opera and dined outdoors.
>Today coffee outdoors. Good living. The day after we arrived we had
>lunch on a boat . Excellent food and beautiful views.
>I gave a keynote at the Award Symposium along with Dr. Bangemann. The
>Real Video of the talks and the complete symposium will be on line
>shortly (it was net broadcasted in real time). The efforts of the
>groups that competed was impressive. I will in a future not
>elaborate on the best of them.
>The City of Stockholm has decided to make permanent the Challenge in the
>form of a Stockholm Prize. I have suggested to them that it would
>be in the spirit of the location and the times to see if we could
>fund a Cyber-Peace Prize to those who advanced the cause of peace
>using the Internet.
>Last night we had the Global Bangemann Award ceremony. The
>King attended and made the awards. It was held in the Blue Room
>where the Nobel is awarded. trumpets and all. After we eat an
>excellent dinner in the Gold room . Very formal and elegant.
>Desert was served in the dark and was candle lit cake. Three
>wines etc. Very impressive.
>We are tired but tomorrow we will go way out the Archipelago
>one way in a power boat and return on an 85 ft world racing yacht.
>Let you know how that goes
>Dave
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 21:59:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] ICANN Commentary Mike Roberts - ICANN is set up by U.S. govt
>From owner-list@ifwp.org Thu Jun 10 21:00:50 1999
Received: from ns1.vrx.net (vrx.net [204.138.71.254])
by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with SMTP id VAA11246
for <ronda@panix.com>; Thu, 10 Jun 1999 21:00:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: william@dso.net (William X. Walsh)
To: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Cc: domain-policy@lists.internic.net, dnso.discuss@lists.association.org,
discuss@dnso.org, list@ifwp.org
Subject: [IFWP] Re: [IDNO:250] [vcerf@MCI.NET: ICANN Commentary (Mike Roberts, David Post)]
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 00:45:54 GMT
Message-ID: <376e5b07.17795440@mail.dso.net>
References: <199906110034.MAA88746@tardis.patho.gen.nz>
In-Reply-To: <199906110034.MAA88746@tardis.patho.gen.nz>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: owner-list@ifwp.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: list@ifwp.org
Status: R
william@dso.net (William X. Walsh) writes
>What Mr Roberts fails to mention is that the INTERIM board has no
>authority to be making MANY of the decisions it has been making under
>the white paper and indeed its own charter.
But also the U.S. govt under the White paper has outlined what
ICANN can do and thus has created ICANN in violation of the
Government Corporate Control Act.
>This boards primary goal was supposed to be getting an ELECTED board
>in place, and from comments from Ms Dyson, it looks like one more year
>till then. I blame this delay on ICANN itself, they have failed to
>take the steps that would of led to an open ICANN membership, and
>intentionally delayed the creation of an Initial Board. They use the
>delay as a means of justifying their taking actions beyond the scope
>of their charter.
But membership or election doesn't change the fact that ICANN is
being created without any oversight mechanisms that take into
account the great power and control that the U.S. governemnt is
trying to pass over to ICANN in opposition to what it is
allowed to do.
[
>>On Thu, 10 Jun 1999 17:33:54 -0700, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
>>wrote:
>>Since ICANN and ISOC bashing seems to be a major topic on this list,=20
>>here's some material to counterbalance:
>
>>----- Forwarded message from "vinton g. cerf" <vcerf@MCI.NET> -----
>
>>Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 19:55:11 -0400
>>From: "vinton g. cerf" <vcerf@MCI.NET>
>>Subject: ICANN Commentary (Mike Roberts, David Post)
>>To: "ISOC Members Discussion" <isoc-members-discuss@lyris.isoc.org>
>>Reply-To: ISOC Members Discussion <isoc-members-discuss@lyris.isoc.org>
>
>>I thought this exchange was relevant to ISOC members.
>
>>Vint Cerf
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------=
- ----------
>
>
>>From: Mike Roberts <mmr@darwin.ptvy.ca.us>
>>Subject: Commentary on June 5 Essay re ICANN
>>To: postd@erols.com
>>Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 08:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>>>Commentary on Professor David Post's Essay of June 5 Concerning ICANN
>
>>>As a member of the American university community for more than thirty=20
>>>years, I have the utmost respect for its standards of open inquiry, but=20
>>>I find myself in strong disagreement with the premises, the asserted=20
>>>facts and the logic of Professor Post's recent essay on ICANN, which=20
>>>opens with the statement, "...my goal here is just to suggest that=20
>>>notwithstanding the government's (and ICANN's) protestations to the=20
>>>contrary, this is about nothing less than Internet governance writ=20
>>>large."=20
>
>>>I definitely do protest to the contrary; the facts do not support this=20
>>>conclusion. The truth of the current situation is that ICANN is pursuing=
=20
>>>its work program as spelled out in the Government's White Paper on the=20
>>
>>>Management of Internet Names and Addresses and in the Department of=20
Hence the U.S. government has in fact created ICANN in violation
of the laws allowing it to do so!
>>>Commerce's Memorandum of Understanding/Joint Project Agreement with=20
>>>ICANN that was executed last November. The tasks set forth therein=20
>>>include (extract from the contract):
>
Under the communications act of 1934 the U.S. government is obligated
to regulate the communications medium in the U.S. and hence the
Internet.
>>>a. Establishment of policy for and direction of the allocation of IP=20
>>>number blocks;=20
>
>>>b. Oversight of the operation of the authoritative root server system;=20
>
>>>c. Oversight of the policy for determining the circumstances under which=
=20
>>>new top level domains would be added to the root system;=20
>
>>>d. Coordination of the assignment of other Internet technical parameters=
=20
>>>as needed to maintain universal connectivity on the Internet; and=20
>
>>>e. Other activities necessary to coordinate the specified DNS management=
=20
>>>functions, as agreed by the Parties."
>
(...)
Ronda
ronda@panix.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 00:03:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ronda Hauben <ronda@panix.com>
Subject: [netz] Positive Role of Govt & Internet Hot Potato for Foundation Funding
I just had a strange experience. I had been seeking support for a
Government role in Internet related research project I was planning
to do and had been encouraged to apply to a certain foundation which
supports research in the history of science and technology.
I looked at their web page and even called them and asked how to
apply. I was told to send a letter and that I could send it via
email. And I was told who to send the letter to at the Foundation.
I worked on a proposal for the research I had identified which has
to do with the government role in the development of the Internet in
the U.S. which had to do with the development of a computer science
research community as part of ARPA/IPTO (Advanced Projects Research
Agency/Information Projects Techniques Office).
I sent the proposal via email as I was told I could do.
I tried to call the person who I had been told to send the proposal
to and he wasn't in.
About 20 minutes letter I got back an email telling me that the
proposal was rejected and good luck.
I found that strange as in the past I had applied to foundations and
had been invited to discuss the proposal and they in turn told me what
they funded or were interested in.
It seemed however as if the positive role that government played
in the development of the Internet and of the computer science
community is a hot potato this foundation didn't want to touch.
However, this foundation had funded a similar study of another
research entity within the U.S. government and so had to treat
the proposal seriously if there was any reality to the application
process.
Thus it seems as if this treatment by the foundation shows the
importance of doing the study.
The proposal follows:
- ---------------------------
Proposal:
Research Proposal:
A Study of the IPTO Computer Science Research Community
(1962-1986)
A number of books and articles about the Internet and the
important computer developments of our time refer to the
Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) at the Advanced
Research Projects Agency (ARPA) within the U.S. Department of
Defense (DOD). This office of ARPA was created in 1962 and it
continued to make important contributions to computer science
development in the U.S. and the world until it was ended in 1986.
Yet very little is known about the office and its development.
Under IPTO's direction computing went from batch processing
to interactive computing, graphic capabilities of computers were
revolutionized, packet switching was developed into the ARPANET
which spread around the U.S., the field of artificial
intelligence (AI) led to important breakthroughs in robotics,
expert systems and identifying other important capabilities
of computers, and the Internet protocol TCP/IP was created and
led to an internetwork of networks which spread round the world.
These are only a few of the outstanding computer science
achievements which occurred under the leadership of this
office. Yet there has been little research study and attention
paid to the role of this office as an institution within
government and to the interactions with the computer science
research community that it helped to create and which in turn
provided the needed input for its leadership.
Very few books or articles even refer to this topic. The one
book that has been written "Transforming Computer Technology" by
Arthur Norberg and Judy O'Neill (Baltimore, 1996) focuses on the
technological accomplishments under this office, rather than on
the institutional processes that made these technological
accomplishments possible.
There are, however, a series of interviews of the IPTO
research community done by the Charles Babbage Institute and
funded by the IPTO before it was ended. I am interested in
studying these interviews to explore what it is possible to learn
about the role of the IPTO in supporting and giving leadership to
make possible these important computer science breakthroughs. I
am interested in the role of government and the role of the
computer science research community and the interface between
them to make computer science leaps possible.
I have done some preliminary research which clarifies the
serious considerations given to how to interface scientists and
government which was carried out in the 1950's and which prepared
the way for the creation of ARPA. I want to explore the
additional insight that can be gained from the experience of IPTO
in creating an appropriate interface between science and
government. Also the ARPANET and then the Internet helped to
provide a broader set of input and communication for the IPTO
after they were created by this office. I want to look at how the
developing network impacted the work at IPTO. There is at least
one mailing list archives I have access to which will make it
possible to pursue this question.
I anticipate this research will take me one year to do this
study. And I am requesting a $30,000 grant. I will produce a
publishable article or book as a result of the study.
I am co-author of Netizens: On the History and Impact of
Usenet and the Internet which was published by the IEEE Computer
Society Press in 1997. I have spent the past seven years studying
and writing about the computer science developments of the past
30 years, particularly focusing on networking. My writing has
been published in online and professional journals including the
IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Counterpoint, First
Monday, the Amateur Computerist and CMC magazine. I plan this
study as a foundation to learn more about the role of the U.S.
government in creating the Internet. Also I have found the
research and book by Harvey Sapolsky about the Navy and Science
(about the Office of Naval Research) which was supported by the
your Foundation, of interest and helpful in the research I am
proposing to do.
I look forward to hearing from you in response to my
proposal. I would be happy to speak with you further about it
either on the phone or in person.
Sincerely
Ronda Hauben
(212)787-9361
rh120@columbia.edu
------------------------------
End of Netizens-Digest V1 #307
******************************
