Chat Log #1 - Dialogue with the ICANN North-American Candidates

Nickname - Message
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:16) Welcome to theDialogue among the ICANN candidates. I am a 3L student here at Harvard Law School participating in Jonathan Zittrain's Internet and Society course.
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:18) Hey folks! Has the event already started in realtime? I know there's a bit of a lag on the web.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:21) The event has just begun.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:22) Are you getting the stream yet?
<DanH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:23) Yes, it's coming through great.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:24) Do any of you feel like introducing yourself? Or you might want to mention which issues you particularly hope to see addressed today.
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:24) Maryanne, is there anyway to up the volume on the candidates?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:25) I will check it out.
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:25) she's better. they just need to really use the microphone
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:36) Do you each have favorites going into this discussion?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:41) Can you see the screen that Zittrain is refering to that the candidates are answering on?
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:41) nope
<DanH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:42) The responses are showing up in the scribe's notes
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:42) good point
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:46) Have any of you personally experienced ICANN's "lack of transparency" of which the candidates are talking??
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:48) not personally, no.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:50) That seemed like a cheap shot at Lessig on Miller's part - I guess politics in action.
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:50) Does Lessig think there should ever be any form of top-down architecting agency for the internet?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:52) My interpretation is that he envisions a very limited role for ICANN. He seems to be saying that a small role need not have a top down approach because there is not an inordinate amount to accomplish. Do you think this would work?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:55) Do you think the membership of ICANN is corporate/business heavy? I have no idea.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:56) Can people do "technology" as Barbara suggests without de facto making policy?
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:56) I imagine that as the culture of the net has changed (ie become more corporate), ICANN has seen itself becoming increasingly corporate
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:57) Ah. I see. So Lessig isn't necessary anti-regulation, he's anti ICANN.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 16:59) Well that's the odd thing about him - I think he doesn't want anyone to regulate very much - i.e., not ICANN, but also not anyone else. But if ICANN doesn't regulate, won't someone else fill the void?
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:00) Well, he would say that the code will provide the regulation.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:01) And de facto the people who create the code control the regulation, right?
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:01) Right. I don't think he's ever answered the question of who will regulate the codemakers.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:02) What do any of you think about the US dominance issue?
<LawrenceH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:02) The Internet is corporate. However, most corporations have many avenues to affect policy. ICANN is an easy way for NGOs and individuals to impact policy internationally.
<LawrenceH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:03) US dominance is real. ICANN is a US corporation .
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:04) Which of the candidates do you think would be most likely to expand participation/decision-making beyond the US?
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:04) Man, Jesse Helms would have a coronary if he heard some of these guys and their "supernational" talk
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:06) Jesse Helms has a coronary about the word international, period, I think! But you are right - this supranational talk, given the current basis of legitimacy or lack thereof, is concerning.
<KevenB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:11) So what is a rough taxonomy of the views presented here? Lessig is against ICANN making policy. Miller is pro policy. Where do the others fit in?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:12) What do you al think? Representative model or trustee model?
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:15) I would prefer the representative model, but how do you explain these incredibly difficult technical issues to the Internet public, most of whom don't have the ability or interest to deal with with technical issues.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:15) Some of them seem to be split more along who is or should be represented in ICANN rather than along policy v. not policy divides.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:18) You do raise an interesting point - how would a member "represent" the interests of people who are not aware of their own interests, concerns, etc?
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:18) Auerbach points out another problem w/ the representation model here: how can we be sure that the board member is truly representing his /her constituents?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:19) Chapin seems to want to expand the policy role in the future.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:20) "representation" seems a pretty tricky term to define in this space.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:21) By the way, if you want to ask questions of the candidates, you can submit the questions directly through the comment section.
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:22) Who do you think is "winning" here?
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:23) What's the problem w/ letting governments determine these policies, and using already existing international institutions (like UN) to resolve discrepancies in national policies? Wouldn't this solve the problem of represntation, etc.?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:24) So you are suggesting that only the conflicts in policy rise to the level of the international institution?
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:24) My questions to the candidates: Should the DOC's authority over the root zone file be transferred to ICANN or to a third organization?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:26) Unfortunately, I cannot cut and paste your question to the "Ask a Question to the ASsembled Group" - I think it is a great question though, so while I try to figure out how to pass it on here - I would suggest you try to re-ask it there. Thanks.
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:26) Sounds like Ms. Simons just gave us her answer to my question!
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:28) Sorry, are you referring to my question or to Matthews and where exactly do I have to put my question in?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:29) Sorry - Jeanette - I did mean your question. I was able to rewrite it to the tech people here, which should work. The section that you could post it to is a link at the bottom of the right corner of the screen in the window under the video.
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:30) thx! ;-)
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:31) What do you think about the legitimacy of the UDRP?
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:32) It clearly favors trademark owners!
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:32) UDRP sounds great to me, as long as you can take your complaints to court. Cuts down drastically on litigation costs, and prevents courts from getting clogged up!
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:38) If UDRP favors trademark owners, and litigation is expensive, does the UDRP then over act by taking domain names away from people who might not be likely in the end to litigate?
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:42) It's a cheap way for reverse domain name hijacking...
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:43) True, true
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:43) Are you sure that questions from the remote audience are acceptet at all?
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:45) Yes - but I am afraid that they may run out of time. I just clicked on the "Ask a Question to teh Assembled Group" at the bottom right of the page, and managed to get the question screen. I also passed on the question at this end.
<JeanetteH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:47) thx for your efforts
<ModeratorMaryanne> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:48) Thank you all for your participation. I hope you enjoyed the discussion by the candidates.
<MatthewB> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:49) Thanks, Maryanne!
<DanH> (Mon, October 02, 2000 at 17:51) Nice job Ben! Thanks.