[IRP] Proposal for IRP to register as an At Large Structure

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi Lisa, Wolf, Olivier and all,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that there are at least  
three conditions to join ALAC that are not met by the IRP coalition:

1- Be an organization, and as far as I understand a registered one,  
while IRP is a loose (not registered) group
2- Be a national or regional organization, since ALAC is structured  
into geographic regional structures, e.g. Wolf is proposing to join  
EURALO, which is the European regional structure (made up of regional  
organizations having joined ALAC), while IRP is a global coalition
3- Be individual user organizations, while IRP is not only a  
multistakeholder coalition, but also a coalition made up of both  
individuals and various organizations (NGOs, academic institutions,  
IGOs, businesses, governments)
See: http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/framework.htm for the criteria  
and their explanation.

These arguments are only with regards to formal membership criteria.

Most importantly, even if the IRP coalition eventually meets the  
"administrative" membership criteria, we need to collectively discuss  
from a substantive point of you whether it is desirable for it to  
join ALAC.

The first issue I see is that we don't have the human resources to do  
this in an effective manner: we already have an important project  
(the charter) which is mobilizing the few resources that we can  
devote to the IRP work, given that all of us are volunteering on  
this. Are we really able to, in addition, substantively participate  
to ALAC work?

The second issue, which is related, is: do we want to concentrate on  
- or at least dedicate part of our work to - a single, though  
important, aspect of Internet governance, namely the domain name  
system and some other critical Internet resources, while the very  
raison d'etre of the coalition, namely human rights in the digital  
environment in a very broad sense (including the DNS and CIR as part  
of this environment constitution: remember our discussions on  
"layers") is far broader?

The third issue, which is more of a political discussion, is: do we  
think that we should be part of the ALAC and other structures of the  
ICANN system, thus backing - without any discussion - this system?

These are my thoughts on this proposal. The different issues are  
exposed above in increasing order of both importance and  risk for  
the coalition to literally sink in an ICANN-dominated discussion.  
While it is certainly more stimulating to discuss the third  
substantive issue, I would prefer that one of the three  
administrative issues provides us with the answer, so that the  
coalition may continue to dedicate its resources to our main  
collective project, that is, the Charter.

Obviously, since we have active members of the IRP who are also part  
of the ALAC members, it would certainly be fruitful that they serve  
as cross-fertilizers of both groups: our work on the Charter might be  
used by the ALAC group working on the "Registrant Bill of Rights /  
Registrar Best Practices" project, and conversely this ALAC group  
might be really helpful by bringing inputs to the Charter provisions  
concerning DNS/CIR.

Best,
Meryem

Le 4 oct. 10 ? 12:57, Lisa Horner a ?crit :

> Dear all
>
> Please see below a note from Wolf Ludwig, suggesting that the IRP  
> join ALAC-EURALO.  Olivier and Rafik have also been looking at how  
> we can best coordinate with ICANN and its networks (ALAC and NCSG).
>
> Thanks Wolf for this invitation and for your support.
>
> What do people think about this proposal?
>
> Olivier - please could you send through the note you drafted before  
> which gives a bit more background about ALAC.
>
> Thanks,
> Lisa
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wolf Ludwig [mailto:wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net]
> Sent: 22 September 2010 15:05
> To: parminder; Lisa Horner; Meryem Marzouki
> Cc: b at nwagner.org; Wolfgang Benedek; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> Subject: Re: [IRP] IRP IGF notes
>
> Dear Parminder, Lisa and all,
>
> as discussed in Vilnius with Lisa, Wolfgang, Ben and others, we were
> not active to add much input to the IRP Charter discussion and process
> but we can help to promote its impact.
>
> It was Max Senges, Vittorio Bertola and others who organised a WG on
> IRP at the 1st ICANN Internet User Summit in Mexico in March 2009. In
> the final declaration of this Summit At-Large at ICANN announced - as
> a commitment! - that we will follow-up this discussion in related fora
> (like IGF etc.) and we nominated two people for it. In the time  
> between
> not so much happened ...
>
> The excellent draft what was submitted at the recent IGF offers a good
> opportunity to re-start the discussion at the ALAC-ICANN level. One
> option to foster this discussion among ICANN user representatives  
> could
> be if the dynamic coalition would join ALAC - EURALO as an At-Large
> Structure (ALS). Such a membership brings EURALO in a position to push
> the IRP Charter on the ALAC agenda again. Other scenarios can be
> discussed as well ... It's just to reconfirm that we will try our  
> best to
> support the further IRP process.
>
> Kind regards,
> Wolf
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp- 
> internetrightsandprinciples.org