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

Wolf Ludwig wolf.ludwig
Wed Oct 6 13:27:10 EEST 2010

Hello Meryem, Lisa and all,

Please allow me to add my answers and comments below.

Meryem Marzouki wrote 05/10/2010 11:13: 
>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.

(Wolf) Whether an organisation/ALS is officially registered or not depends 
on the national association laws in the respective countries. Some 
certified ALSes at EURALO (in Germany and Switzerland at least) are not 
officially registered, some specified purposes, goals, rules or Bylaws were 
sufficient to become an ALS.

>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.

(Wolf) What you describe, Meryem, is a common understanding of 
national or regional organizations at ALAC. In some cases EURALO 
includes national chapters of global coalitions or societies or associations 
like ISOC or Wikimedia. Whether IRP as a global coalition will be affiliated 
to EURALO / the European Regional At-Large Organisation of ALAC is a 
question that needs to be discussed.

>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.

(Wolf) Many of our certified ALSes consists of both individuals and 
organizations (like NGOs, academic institutions etc.). What we normally 
don?t have are business and government members among our ALSes.  
And I agree, the characteristics of a broad based dynamic coalition like 
IRP would be a novelty for EURALO and ALAC ? but an important case to 
be considered, including the formal membership criteria.

>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.

(Wolf) I entirely agree with you that such a discussion is essential!

>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?

(Wolf) This is an important argument as well. As I pointed out in my 
previous mail, the Charter is the main focus and goal of IRP. Once or 
while the Charter will be accomplished, outreach and channelling 
discussions on the substance of the Charter is important as well. I think, 
these are not competitive but complementary tasks if you want to increase 
the impact of the Charter in the relevant IG foras (besides the IGF).

>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?

(Wolf) Many members of EURALO ALSes were involved in the WSIS process 
and the human rights in the digital society debate since 2002 and became 
involved in ALAC afterwards. At EURALO our discussions were always 
broader than the focus on the DN system, issues like privacy and FoE are 
continuing debates at EURALO ? and we (Max Senges and Vittorio Bertola) 
brought the IRP issue on the agenda of ALAC?s 1st Internet User Summit 
in Mexico in March 2009. And EURALO would like to follow-up and push 
the IRP debate at ALAC and ICANN in future. 

>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?

(Wolf) This, of course, is a political discussion needed. But as mentioned 
before, IGF and ICANN are complementary foras for many of our members 
-- thus backing this (ICANN) 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.

(Wolf) I hope that my answers and comments are helpful and stimulating 
this discussion.

>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.

(Wolf) I would like to underline what you concluded, Meryem, that EURALO 
and parts of our members could ?serve as cross-fertilizers of both groups? 
and your/IRP work on the Charter is relevant and crucial for the 
"Registrant Bill of Rights / Registrar Best Practices" project (what is not 
progressing at the moment as some of us wish it should be) ... I think, 
IRP and ALAC could benefit from each other.

Kind regards,

>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
>IRP mailing list
>IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org

phone +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig

Digitale Allmend
http://blog.allmend.ch -

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation

More information about the IRP mailing list