Question: I would like to ask the at large nominees to comment on their relationship with internet stakeholders such as registrars or businesses with a large internet investment, or with national governments in North America. Please contrast this with your position on input to the ICANN process from private individuals.

Nominee Replies

Donald Langenberg - posted on 2000-10-01 19:01:21 As noted in my candidate's statement, my relationship with Internet-related business is confined to some rather modest personal investments in some of them. (Remember, I'm an academic, not a .com millionaire.) Apart from occasional testimony before Congressional committees and service on federal panels or advisory boards, I have no relationship with the U.S. federal government. As I have repeatedly stated here and elsewhere, ICANN has many stakeholders, including private individuals, businesses, and governments. ICANN and its board must seek to serve the interests of all of them in a balanced and equitable way. Lyman Chapin - posted on 2000-09-21 18:56:07 My participation in Internet and other professional groups has always been as an individual, rather than as a representative of a corporate position. I work for BBN Technologies, which has a long history of supporting contributors to the technical development of the Internet. Three years ago BBN was acquired by GTE, which is now Verizon; but this has not compromised my independence as a technical expert, nor my ability to represent the individual at-large perspective on the ICANN board. Emerson Tiller, J.D., Ph.D. - posted on 2000-09-17 20:31:51 Relationship with registrars: To my knowledge, I hold no direct financial interest in a registrar. My only relationship with registrars would be as a domain name registrant. Relationship with businesses with a large Internet investment. I own stock in several companies, some of which may operate on the Internet or have a stake in its success. It's hard to own stock in a company that doesn't have some Internet interest. But, if elected, I would have not problem putting my holdings in blind trust, or completely divesting. The amount is small. Relationships with national governments in North America. I'm a citizen of the U.S. Position on input to the ICANN process from private individuals. Such input should be welcomed as long as the contact and the identity of the private individual is transparent to the membership. Lawrence Lessig - posted on 2000-09-14 00:34:02 I have no relationship (save sometime-critic) of the stakeholders you list. The question, however, is a good one: the challenge for the at-large process is to find a way to balance the powerful input these bodies have with the legitimate input of private individuals. ICANN hasn't yet done that, and we haven't yet a perfect way to assure it can be done. Karl Auerbach - posted on 2000-09-11 12:02:59 Well, I work in the Advanced Internet Architecture Group at Cisco Systems - and Cisco is both a creditor of ICANN and a major player in the Internet, particularly with regard to IP address spaces. However, my candidacy is distinct and apart from my role at Cisco. Nor do I in any way purport to speak for Cisco. (Like many at the company, I do hold some Cisco common stock.) Getting to the last part of your question - I believe that individual people form the atomic unit of the Internet. The at-large itself came about, in part, because of the Boston Working group, which I co-founded. Ira Magaziner thanked me and the BWG for giving him the leverage to push ICANN to even have the notion of a membership. I've been active in the creation of an Individual Domain Name Owners' Constituency in the DNSO and was a participant in the DNSO general assembly until they adopted what I feel are inappropriate censorship rules on the primary mailing list used for discussion. Overall, I believe that ICANN is far too much under the control of business groups and far too little open to access by-, much less control by-, the users of the Internet.