May 2009 - KICTANet

Protecting Children Online & on Mobile
by Wainaina Mungai 17 May '09

17 May '09

Hi The World Telecommunications and Information Society Day will be in a few days - 17th May. The theme is on protection of children in cyberspace.... That led me to wonder how/if we are working to protect children from Mobile Content now that there is alot of adult content sold on mobiles e.g. Wall papers, adult tips on relationships, dating services etc. Children now have access to both web and mobile - with mobiles being harder to monitor. Who out there is working on such issues? Wainaina -- Sent from my mobile device --- http://www.bungesms.com http://www.madeinkenya.org

4 5

Re: [kictanet] Protecting Children Online & on Mobile
by John Walubengo 16 May '09

16 May '09

Wainaina, Content control is a big animal. Right from Policy through to Implementation, there will be conflicting positions by different stakeholders... However, the practice in more developed economies is to ensure that "Adult Content" whether online/sms/mms etc is ONLY accessible through credit card numbers. This works to protect (cut out) a large group of "under 18s" but at the same time makes the "over 18s" feel extremely monitored....i.e. nobody wants his /her credit card statements showing the digital "K-Streets" they have been visiting... I do hope this issues will be discussed in the upcoming content discussions. walu. --- On Wed, 5/13/09, Wainaina Mungai <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> wrote: > From: Wainaina Mungai <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> > Subject: [kictanet] Protecting Children Online & on Mobile > To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 11:10 AM > Hi > > The World Telecommunications and Information Society Day > will be in a > few days - 17th May. The theme is on protection of children > in > cyberspace.... > > That led me to wonder how/if we are working to protect > children from > Mobile Content now that there is alot of adult content sold > on mobiles > e.g. Wall papers, adult tips on relationships, dating > services etc. > > Children now have access to both web and mobile - with > mobiles being > harder to monitor. Who out there is working on such > issues? > > Wainaina > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > --- > http://www.bungesms.com > > http://www.madeinkenya.org > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > This message was sent to: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com >

1 0

THE MESSIAH WITHIN,,Redeeming the Soul of Our Nation
by alice 16 May '09

16 May '09

*From:* njonjo mue [mailto:njonjo@knchr.org] *Subject:* THE MESSIAH WITHIN *THE MESSIAH WITHIN* *Redeeming the Soul of Our Nation* * * *BY NJONJO MUE* * * [As Kenyans struggle to find meaning in the shenanigans surrounding their body politic, Njonjo Mue challenges the youth to join an army of ordinary people to fight the good fight; to defend our freedom, dignity, heritage and our children’s future, by engaging in brutal self-appraisal and refusing to aid decay. It is a call to arms - for men to leave the bars long enough to know what their children will eat for supper; for women to cease their escapism and confront the problems facing our communities; and for all of us to individually take responsibility for the future of our country.] /An army of ordinary people/ /A kingdom where love is the key/ /A city, a light to the nations/ /Heirs to the promise are we/ /A people whose life is in Kenya/ /A nation together we stand/ /Truly by birth are we worthy/ /Inheritors of the land/ / / /A new dawn is coming/ /A new age has come/ /When the children of promise/ /Shall stand together as one/ /A truth long neglected/ /But the time has now come/ /When the children of promise/ /Must fight together as one./ / / /(Adapted from a hymn by Dave Bilbrough, © 1983, Kingsways Thankyou Music)/ / / */ /* */Of being, belonging and identity…/* What is Kenya and what makes you a Kenyan? Is it your ID card? Your blue passport? The fact that you were born here? Do you feel connected? Do you belong? Are you more or less Luo, Kamba, Kipsigis, Mijikenda, Asian, Caucasian or Arab than Kenyan? Are you more or less male or female that Kenyan? Are you more or less Christian, Muslim or Hindu that Kenyan? How do these multiple identities play themselves out in your psyche? Do you feel the need to run away from any one of them in order to embrace your /Kenyanness/? In other words, what is your identity and what real connection do you have with Kenya? What makes you proud to be a Kenyan? If you had to choose from among all the multiple identities that you have, would you choose to retain or drop your Kenyan identity? Why or why not? */The ties that bind…/* Our parents’ generation was born into 42 different nationalities. However, they became Kenyans as they united to fight the common enemy of colonial domination. Once that enemy was defeated, they then went about determining the terms of their social contract, in Lancaster House and at home, in commendable efforts to build a nation. Have they succeeded? How and where have they failed? What about us? 45 years later, what common enemy do we face? On what basis shall we negotiate our new social contract? Will the glue that held our parents’ generation together remain strong enough to bind us? The answer is clearly in the negative. For we can see all around us depressing and alarming evidence that the social compact that once defined Kenya is quickly coming apart. The demon of political tribalism rears its ugly head with reckless abandon, as politicians declare that it is their turn to eat and then form all sorts of diabolical alliances to prepare how they might divide the spoils, and as they look determined to fight it out to the end, grabbing for power without caring if the nation falls apart in the process. The need for renegotiating the social contract has been acknowledged by all, but there is seemingly no committed leadership with the courage and vision to lead us in navigating through these uncharted waters. We wander aimlessly in the wilderness of our despair, longing for our Land of Promise, but not even the mirage of social cohesion appears on the horizon. Yet we have no choice in this matter. We must hold a genuine national dialogue on how to define our new dispensation – and by this I do not mean merely discussing how to share power, for a society is more that the power structure to which it subscribes. The more we prevaricate on the need for national dialogue, the more certain quarters of our society continue to hold destructive monologues that push us ever closer to the brink. We cannot leave things to run their own course. The train of liberty does not roll forward on the wheels of inevitability; it must be pushed, sometimes pulled; but always kept on track and moving towards the goal of social justice, national cohesion and the true and wholesome development of the human person. The generation gone before us appears to have run out of ideas on how to do this. This is hardly surprising considering that those who call the shots have been on the scene forever – they are exhausted, old and without a real stake in the future of our country. It is now up to us to take a stand and impose an environment of order to eliminate the daily chaos in our midst. In so doing, we will start to define a new vision for this country and to march decisively towards our collective sustainable future. */ /* */ /* */Heart of the Country or Soul of the Nation?/* */ /* Politicians pretend to care a great deal about the need for a new constitution, but we all know that for them, the process is little more than glorified power play. Although the Constitution is the heart of the country, from which the entire legal system gets its lifeblood, in the end, only a small number of people will dominate the constitution-making process. Further, even if they came up with the best document in the world, it would still only be half the job done. The other, more fundamentally half, is to reconstruct the soul of our nation. This is the responsibility of every citizen and cannot be left to politicians and their gate-keepers alone. It is an exercise which defines what the essence of being Kenyan is. What is the soul of our nation? What are the ties that bind? What are the criteria for belonging? In other words, what are the core values that make us who we are, above our diverse ethnic nationalities and beneath our common citizenship of the human family? As our favourite native son, Barack Obama, reminds us, the Constitution is not just a source of individual rights, but also a means of organizing a democratic conversation around our collective future. And so it is vital to reach a consensus on the values we espouse as Kenyans, for we cannot move forward as a nation until we know and internalize what that nationhood entails. Until we each individually and voluntarily subscribe to a core set of beliefs. Once consensus on this is attained, then we can ascribe censure to those who choose to transgress our compact through mutually agreed coercion. This is the essence of a society governed by laws and not by men. Currently, we only belong to Kenya largely by accident of birth. We largely identify with the State only in its coercive sense; in the sense that we see policemen telling us what to do on pain of punishment in accordance with a legal code we had little input in promulgating. We are also Kenyans by virtue of the fact that every June 30^th we have a date with KRA which comes knocking on our doors seeking to know how much income we earned the previous year and whether we have given unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar. We also think we belong because we demand rights that are hardly recognized or protected and services that the government is unwilling or unable to provide. We understand the workings of government better today than we did ten years ago. However this has not made our lives better because, in spite of more transparency, there is no corresponding accountability on the part of the government or ourselves as citizens. We live in an age of lawlessness and impunity. Citizens feel no obligation to obey laws that do not bind those who make them. There is no sense of enlightened self-interest in making our systems work or in contributing to the public good. In addition, there are few role models left to follow, for we have allowed politicians to dominate our public space and to perpetually pollute our air with the stench of their incorrigibly bad manners. Therefore, we need to find positive things that draw us to our /Kenyanness/, things that will make us assert confidently, ‘/We are Kenyans by choice!/’ We need to find a new focal point for our allegiance as citizens of Kenya. */ /* */What is Kenya and who are Kenyans?/* */ /* At its most basic, Kenya is a juridical fact in international law. It is also a piece of real estate comprising 583,000 hectares of land occupied by some 37 million people who are as diverse as can be in ethnic belonging, religious affiliation, occupational persuasion, racial origin and social status. In this dynamic mix, is there value in being called a Kenyan? I believe there is by all means. But we are yet to fully appreciate it. That is why many of us continue to retreat into our ethnic cocoons whenever crises arise. But we need to start defining that value and to clarify to ourselves what value we as a country and as a people add to the world around us. All this cannot be done within a short period of time, for the search for nationhood is a long-term project. It is a conversation with ourselves that shall have no end, for what constitutes Kenya and Kenyans will continue to evolve as the world around us changes. But as globalization makes the world ever more homogenous, we need to identify and nurture our core values, those that make us uniquely Kenyan. This exercise cannot be the preserve of any one person or group of people however defined. The endeavour to define these values has to be a national exercise involving all who bear the name of Kenya and reaching across all the strata of our nation. It will not be easy to arrive at consensus. Yet we must keep faithfully on this course until we are able to define ourselves and know and fully internalize who we really are. For as long as we keep allowing others to define us – politicians and tribal chiefs, Western hegemonic geopolitical interests, the World Bank, the IMF, and a myriad other amorphous interests and agendas – we shall remain buffeted by winds of change, ones that make one demand of us one day and another the next. Instead of being the masters of our destiny, we shall forever react to the actions of others. Always waiting for them to tell us who we are and what we must do next to water out the fire of self-destruction in our own homes. In other words, we shall be enslaved to the whims of others. Tossed hither by torrents of oppression and thither by waves of despair, all the while becoming the laughing stock of neighbours near and far; the subject of after-dinner conversations from South Korea to South Africa – whispers about a people who once seemed to be going somewhere but who got shipwrecked in the high seas of greed, economic collapse, socio-political confusion and moral decline. If things appear desperate for us today, it is because they are. The road to our Land of Promise has been long and treacherous and there is no end in sight. One’s heart has to bleed as one looks around our country. Low intensity warfare and conflict violently and routinely disrupt the lives of innocents in urban and rural areas while Mungiki and other criminal gangs terrorize the populace with impunity and with the tacit support of the political class; all this while trigger-happy policemen gun down perceived criminals and answer to no one but themselves. Poverty, inequality and underdevelopment are the defining feature of our age. Famine is the order of the day in many communities, hunger a constant companion to children across the land. AIDS continues to wipe us out indiscriminately, ravaging our fragile economy, leaving orphans to fend for themselves and frail grandmothers to look after helpless grandchildren. Crime and corruption are eating away at the soul of our nation, and responsible political leadership is a concept that has altogether eluded us. We have touched the nadir of despair, and darkness has fallen across the land. We have become exiles from and refugees in our own country. IDPs continue to endure life in desolate ‘transit’ camps; our children find solace in the streets where drugs or regular sniffs of glue help them to accept the morbidity of their daily existence; our men have taken refuge in bars to consume large quantities of liquor to dull the gnawing pain of helplessness and the silent pangs of despair; and our women have found shelter in religious crusades to be fed generous doses of the sweet by-and-by to enable them to endure the nasty now-and-now! The rest of us have become so impoverished and bereft of ideas and morality that we have lost our way altogether and become ourselves predators. We have no qualms about robbing the poor and exploiting the weak in our midst. We have sadly fulfilled Mwalimu Nyerere’s prophecy about Kenya being a man-eat-man society. Amidst all this confusion, we have pushed politics to the centre of our existence. We continually engage in a strange conversation where all do the talking while no one is really listening. We conspire against the poor when they cry out for real solutions to real problems by forming endless commissions, task forces and committees that only end up creating jobs for ourselves for which the poor are forced to pay us astronomical salaries and benefits while producing no real results for the country. Our politics is a politics of the stomach – of greed and exploitation. Having presided over the wholesale dismantling of our collective hope, the political class can now set the rules, rules that revolve around money – stolen money! And so this cycle of poverty goes round and round. I steal money today which I use to bribe you to send me to Parliament or the Local Council tomorrow with the single aim of stealing more money to purchase my seat the next round and make a handsome profit in the process. When shall we stop this cycle of madness? I say NOW!! Now is the time to draw a line in the sand! Now is the time to say to anyone who subscribes to this madness, ‘ENOUGH!’Now is the time to take a stand against these predators! Now is the time to reclaim our human dignity! Now is the time to start our long march to our true Land of Promise! What we do now will determine what kind of country our children will inherit. Let no one fool you that it does not matter what we do. The choices we make today shall have irreversible consequences for generations to come. We are the people who shall save or lose Kenya. We are not perfect and we will make our mistakes, but the greatest mistake we can make now is to do nothing. /So, do something!/ / / But first we must first do away with the futile search for a messiah who will come and fix everything for us. For the messiah we look for is to be found inside each one of us. We must each take personal responsibility in defining and enforcing our new social contract. We must say ‘No’ to any person who would seek to exploit us and use us as stepping stones to the corridors of the abuse of power. We must find the courage to believe in ourselves again and say ‘No’ to their destructive ‘favours’ and demeaning patronage for which we have hitherto sold our birth right. It is time to impose a new set of rules: a paradigm that puts country above personal comfort, our children’s inheritance and collective security above individual gain. *Fighting the good fight* * * Kenya is at war. And this is a fact whether it is acknowledged or not. We may not see tanks and troops on the streets and we may not go to bed with the sound of gunfire ringing in our ears. But we are at war. The enemies we face are more dangerous than a conventional army. They may not destroy our infrastructure or kill our mortal bodies, but they have stealthily found their way through our defenses and are slowly eating away at the soul of our nation. We boast a form of civilization, but it is an empty shell and it is a matter of time before the whole edifice comes tumbling down. The cost of that eventuality is too ghastly to contemplate. But unlike the politicians, I do not dangle the threat of cataclysmic implosion before your eyes in order to paralyze us into doing nothing, but in order to galvanize us into action. We must urgently retake control of our destiny and our country and start rebuilding the walls around our nationhood. It is not too late to reconstruct the soul of our nation, but the work must start now. Every moment of delay pushes us ever closer to the brink! This is therefore a call-up notice: /All Kenyan men and women are requested to enroll into the Army of Ordinary People. Our sole objective is to defend our heritage from enemies within and without, to reconstruct the soul of our nation, and to lay a firm foundation for our new Republic./ And these are our rules of engagement: The primary theatre of action shall be within ourselves, for ‘there is only one small corner of the world that we can truly change and that is ourselves’. We cannot impose rules on others that we are ourselves unwilling to live by. And so we must start by changing our own behavior, attitudes and mindset. /We must become the change that we seek. / / / The next theatre of action is the world around us – our homes, our schools and colleges, our workplace, our communities and on the road as we drive and commute. We must politely but firmly point out whenever someone transgresses the human dignity of others or of ourselves – all the time being careful not to demand of others higher standards than we ourselves faithfully subscribe to. We must seek to faithfully influence our colleagues to act in the best interests of Kenya. In everything we do, we must constantly ask, /‘will it contribute to the reconstruction of the soul of our nation?’/ / / /What weapons shall our army wield?/ Our conviction, our minds and our bodies. We shall scale the citadels of oppression to proclaim our humanity to those who have forgotten what it is to be human. We shall shun violence in all its forms – violence of thought, language and action. We shall engage in non-violent direct action when necessary to draw attention to our concerns and to bring about positive change. In everything we do, we shall conduct our struggle on the high plane of integrity and honour. Not seeking to conquer our opponents, but to convert them, for our fight is not against persons, but against injustice, against indignity and against oppression. /Counting the cost: What risks do we face?/ The forces pitted against us are many, varied and vicious, and before we engage, we must count the cost. It will cost us – all of us – our very lives. The cause for which we fight will be here long after we have all passed the baton to a new generation. But some of us may have to go before others, for the entrenched forces we oppose are not benign. Therefore, like any other army, the army of ordinary people requires you to prepare to pay the supreme price for your convictions. You and I could die. This is a reality we must be prepared to come to terms with before signing up. But if we wage our struggle with honour and discipline, and if we raise our cause above ourselves, then, even if we die in the struggle, death becomes redemptive. For hundreds and thousands will rise up to take our place; and our blood shall water the tree of freedom and invigorate our nation. /Soon, our nation shall be truly free!/ We could go to prison. But this should not perturb us unduly because for countless people who endure life in the slums or live under the specter of urban insecurity or rural poverty, there is a sense in which our country is one large prison today. And should we end up behind bars, we should take solace in the fact that in those very prisons are men and women, both jailers and jailed, who need to hear our message of hope. We will go to prison willingly and shall ‘transform our jailhouses from dungeons of despair into havens of freedom’. /Soon, both prisoner and prison warder shall be free!/ We could get physically injured. But what else is new? We are already bleeding from a thousand wounds. We suffer the daily indignities of hunger, oppression and disease. The thing to do is to regard every blow that lands upon my unarmed body as the blow of a hammer and chisel that will shape the stones that wound us into the forms of people. So that we might liberate both the oppressed and the oppressor and forever throw off the shackles of fear and brutishness from around the neck of our nation. /Soon both the oppressor and the oppressed shall be free!/ / / /And what is in it for us?/ */ /* I can promise you only hardship and persecution. These are the only guarantees. Our country did not get to the dark place where we find ourselves today overnight, nor will we get out overnight. It will get worse before it gets better. But I also promise you destiny. We were born for such a time as this. Future generations shall be beholden to the army of ordinary people – young men and women who had the courage of their convictions. I call upon you to give up the material comforts of today to build a nation for tomorrow. I dare you to cross the line of the familiar and into the unknown in pursuit of a vision for another country, a better homeland. I challenge you to sow the seeds of a tree you may never personally sit under, that another generation may reap the fruit of dignity, security and prosperity for all. And I call upon you to invest in a future we may both never see that your children and mine might never again be called the children of a lesser god. And may I remind you, my brothers and sisters, that Kenya was the first country in black Africa where the colonial master was not just asked to leave, but was pushed out of our country by our young men and women who risked their all to wrest our country back from those who had stolen our land. A generation has since passed. Our parents can at least claim to have gained that formal independence. What about us? Do we want to leave behind a legacy of having let our country disintegrate during our watch? */Amkeni ndugu zetu!/* */ /* */ /* *Njonjo Mue.* www.uhurugeneration.blogspot.com <http://www.uhurugeneration.blogspot.com> *Nairobi* *11^th May 2009*

1 0

USA: Ex-Air Force Chief: Recruit Bloggers to Wage Afghan Info War
by Brian Munyao Longwe 14 May '09

14 May '09

Interesting to see how the internet is playing a key role in global politics and especially matters related to conflict. Seems the taliban has been a step ahead.... I don't feel very comfortable.... http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/ex-air-force-chief-recruit-bloggers… -- Brian Munyao Longwe e-mail: blongwe(a)gmail.com cell: + 254 722 518 744 blog : http://zinjlog.blogspot.com meta-blog: http://mashilingi.blogspot.com

1 0

Vote4me:-[afnog] REMINDER - AfriNIC Board Elections - deadline - 17 May 2009
by John Walubengo 13 May '09

13 May '09

Dear Netizens, Plse visit: http://www.afrinic.net/elections/comments/?p=18#comments and put in a good word for me. I am running for the AfriNIC Board position to represent the East African Region and would appreciate your +ve comments and votes... walu. nb: Big Thank You for the few individuals who have so far commented. --- On Tue, 5/12/09, lohento(a)oridev.org <lohento(a)oridev.org> wrote: > From: lohento(a)oridev.org <lohento(a)oridev.org> > Subject: [afnog] REMINDER - AfriNIC Board Elections - deadline - 17 May 2009 > To: afnog(a)afnog.org > Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009, 8:50 PM > Dear colleagues, your comments on nominees is an important > step of the > AfriNic election process. Please comment on candidates by > 17 May 2009 6:00 > PM GMT. See below for details and thank you for your > contribution. > > The NomCom > > -------- Message original -------- > Sujet : [AfriNIC-announce] AfriNIC Board Elections: > Announcement of > Candidates and Open Public Comments Period > Date : Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:42:19 +0400 > > > Dear Colleagues, > > A while back you received a notice regarding the nomination > period for The > AfriNIC Board > of Directors elections for the following vacant seats: > > Seat 3: The Southern African Region (Primary and Alternate) > Mandate: 2009 > to 2012 > > Seat 4: The Eastern African Region (Primary and Alternate) > Mandate: 2009 > to 2012 > > We are pleased to announce that six (6) nominations were > received that > qualify for this election > http://meeting.afrinic.net/afrinic-10/nominees09.htm > > The nominees for the East African Region are: > > Mr. John Walubengo > Ms. Lillian Wambui Karanja > > The nominees for the Southern African Region are: > > Mr. Timothy Kasonde KASOLO > Mr. Silvio Cabral Almada > Dr. Paulos Nyirenda > Mr. Mark James ELKINS > > The next step is the “Open Public Comments Period” > which *ends on 17 May > 6:00 PM GMT.* > > To participate in this stage of the election process, > please visit > http://www.afrinic.net/elections/comments/ > where you can view the background information, photos, > answers to key > questions for each of the candidates, and post/read > comments for the > respective candidates. > > The actual elections will take place on 21 May 2009 during > the AfriNIC-10 > event which is scheduled to take place from 10-21 May 2009, > InterContinental Cairo, Citystars Hotel, Cairo Egypt. > > Please let your vote and participation count in this very > important > process. We greatly appreciate your support! > > Sincerely, > > AfriNIC Board Elections 2009 Nomination Committee > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > afnog mailing list > http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan Internet Community comes face to face
by harry＠inds.co.ke 12 May '09

12 May '09

Fellow discussants, I read that act, and as I argued some time back - I felt when the debate was at the time generating some online storm that seemed to pit the media vs the ICT fraternity,while we at the same time seemed to close our eyes on the various clauses in there that just doesn't add up for the consolidation of gains so far made in the ICT industry. While the media voiced out their own concerns, we were contended to sit back perhaps in some bemusement at what this fuss was all about. >From what I gather, most of us really never went through this document, to understand it's implications to this sector. A number of clauses are outrightly punitive, especially to the upcoming entrepreneurs. The clause on the .KE 2nd level name space resellership is a case in point. In fact as Alex has argued, it would make more sense to resell the global domains if licensing in addition to the current maintenance costs threatens to choke out whatever is left in terms of incentives for registrars. This Act also introduces some stringent requirements in order to acquire the licensing. Am just wondering, is this really necessary or we are working to choke the relatively young industry...? IMHO, this being a multistakeholder industry, a point of convergence is quite important that would leave all (if not, a majority of) parties involved and satisfied. Really, am not sure what amount of input from the stakeholders went in to draft this legislation. Urgently, the matters raised on this debate by the various discussants need to be addressed. Now, can we please move to convening a meeting forum to deal with this.I do sincerely hope we will not become the proverbial ostrich and bury our heads in the sand... Harry > Send kictanet mailing list submissions to > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > You can reach the person managing the list at > kictanet-owner(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of kictanet digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes faceto face > with new Legislation (wanjira(a)cck.go.ke) > 2. Re: Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes faceto face > with new Legislation (Solomon Mburu) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 12:03:27 +0000 > From: wanjira(a)cck.go.ke > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes > faceto face with new Legislation > To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > Cc: skunk <skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>, ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net, Kenya ICT > Policy - kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Message-ID: > <2111746612-1242043385-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1510429952-(a)bxe1055.bisx.produk.on.blackberry> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" > > Thanks Walu indeed a meeting to discuss the interpretations/ > implementation would be worthwhile at this point. > > Best > Alice > Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone from Zain Kenya > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Walubengo <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> > > Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 02:32:39 > To: <wanjira(a)cck.go.ke> > Cc: skunk<skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>; <ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net>; Kenya ICT > Policy - kictanet<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes face > to face with new Legislation > > > > Alex, Alice et. al. > > 1stly, I wish to state that the views I expressed in the email were my > personal interpretation of the KCA Act 2009 with regard to domain > registration. I do still stand by them - but if they caused misleading > alarm/crisis - i do not think that it was the intention and motivation of > the KENIC Board (of which I am NOT a member and therefore not authorised > to speak on their behalf). So if the KENIC Board needs to resign, they > should do so for another reason rather than my e-mail. > > 2ndly, I get the feeling from several reactions on this issue that we have > mixed Governance Issues (who and how the .KE namespace is controlled) with > Operational issues (how KENIC has so far been managing the .KE namespace). > > 3rdly, I agree (with Alex) that the confusion so created can no longer be > solved online and somebody must convene a meeting for all stakeholders to > be able to read from the same page. Obviously KENIC and CCK (the > regulator) must take lead on this because to me they are immediately > affected by the turn of events. The rest of us (Users) are likely to feel > the impact months/years later... > > 4thly, such a meeting can only be productive if the following is availed > in advance: > > 1) The Regulator gives direction on what critereon they will use to > distribute the control of this 2nd level namespace to competing bidders > (e.g. First-come First- serve?, Auction (highest-bidder) method?, > Politically correct methods? amongst many others) > > 2) The Regulator gives a roadmap of how they intend to manage the > technical relationship between the local top-level domain (.KE) and the > subsequently licensed private players at the 2nd subdomain levels. My > position still remains that you cannot purport to control the 2nd layer > without implicitly controlling the top layer - otherwise you set yourself > up for a future "technical disobedience" from the top layer. Which in turn > means that the Regulator has to (will?) eventually find a way to control > both the Top and 2nd levels domains. > > 3) KENIC gives direction on how the Internet Community will benefit from > this new dispensation. And yes the SPV route did raise more questions than > answers and so maybe by then, we would have more answers than the > questions. > > I wish to rest my case on this issue until such a time when the face2face > meeting is convened. If it is not - then I guess we just have to wait and > see as the events unfold. Unlike our media friends - we (IT) do not > control the airwaves and worse still our subject is more "esoteric than > sensational" to use the words of one leading Editor and so the wananchi > will be wondering "whose goat has been eaten and by who". > > walu. > > --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: Kenyan >> InternetCommunity comes face to face with new Legislation >> To: alice(a)apc.org >> Cc: jwalu(a)yahoo.com, ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >> Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 10:09 AM >> Walubengo, >> >> An important correction and note: >> >> Section 83F uses discretionary word "may" not >> obligatory "shall" this >> below statement is factually incorrect. >> >> "The law specifies that all second level .KE >> >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the >> country's >> >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission >> of Kenya." >> >> Has CCK has expressly stated intention to require registry >> to be >> licensed? Was CCK letter to kenic shown at the meeting? >> >> The tradition is for the regulator to first publish/call a >> meeting for >> *all* would-be affected sector stakeholders (kenic, >> registrars, and >> ISP in this case). >> >> Kenic should stop making-up a 'crisis'; rushing to >> register 'SPV', >> project urgency approval, than circulate emails to various >> mailing >> lists. >> >> Registering the SPV is dead as a dodo. full stop. Wasahau. >> And at this >> rate should some or all board members consider resigning >> for >> misleading the "Internet Community"? >> >> Alex >> >> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Alex Gakuru >> <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > Title: Section 83F ?"License for country code >> top-level domain" >> > >> > Body: "The Commission may, upon application in >> the prescribed manner >> > and subject to such conditions as it may deem >> necessary, grant >> > licenses under this section authorizing a person to >> administer a >> > sub-domain in the country code top-level domain." >> > >> > Opinion: >> > >> > a) The title implies License for country code >> top-level domain" hence >> > kenic and/or others may apply for country code >> top-level domain >> > licence >> > >> > b) kenic administers "sub-domain in the country >> code top-level domain" >> > registrars merely ?*registers* NOT administer >> sub-domains, unless you >> > are suggesting that hosting is part of >> "administering" a domain thus >> > "to host a .ke domain one needs a licence?" >> > >> > c) Lord forbid your interpretation that retail >> registrars need a >> > licence from CCK be correct. For if so I fear that >> will be last death >> > blow to the remaining .ke public goodwill. Registrars >> already pay >> > annual amounts to kenic and additional >> 'licence' fees burden would >> > discourage them marketing .ke. and their clients would >> understand .com >> > cost savings. Many (including those not kenic >> registrars) presently >> > just recommend .com,,, anyway. >> > >> > d) if in the current situation where kenic is having >> difficulties >> > efficiently serving existing registrars, would you >> expect these >> > registrars to agree to additional "Licenced >> fee" atop already very >> > costly kenic domain prices (compared to .com) >> > >> > e) If kenic board just wanted to form some SPV (btw, >> who are the >> > shareholders?) to compete with poor registrars at the >> retail level, >> > rest assured that then *they* will be left selling .ke >> alone - giving >> > themselves all the discounts you want, completely >> eradicating >> > registrars competition - i.e. strengthen kenic >> monopoly grip on domain >> > pricing not introduce competition any where.. >> > >> > f) Valid claims of increasing competition can only be >> genuine if >> > Section 83F heading is interpreted to mean other >> registries are >> > allowed and those few registries pay licence fee to >> CCK. Those >> > registries stand to better represent various >> Nationally-dispersed >> > "Internet Communities" members, that private >> "SPV" company. BTW, what >> > is the present kenic company-type as is registered by >> Companies >> > Registrar? >> > >> > g) Should above come (f) bring about private-public >> interest conflict, >> > I would then suppose that the spirit to protect of >> public interest >> > over private interest ?on National ICT Policy clause >> "7.1 .... In the >> > event of conflict, public interest shall >> prevail." swings into action? >> > >> > h) Finally Alice, you sit at both Kenic and CCK >> boards. You have had >> > the duty to inform both of them and openly report back >> to everyone on >> > the consequences. Je, ulifanya hivyo??? >> > >> > regards, >> > >> > >> > Alex >> > >> > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:42 PM, alice munyua >> <alice(a)apc.org> wrote: >> >> There seems to be some ?misunderstanding ?about >> what the KCA 2009 ?does? >> >> >> >> It is the introduction of liberalisation at >> >> the sub domain level by creating a >> >> competitive registrar model? ?KENIC remains the >> ccTLD manager of the whole dot KE namespace and >> >> registry operator. What the KCA ammendment does >> only means if a registered company wants to manage/sell the >> second level, i.e. .co.ke, .sc.ke etc. they would need to >> get a ?license from CCK to become an registarar. >> >> This is encouraging competition at the sub domain >> level and from my interpretation that is progress.. >> >> Best >> >> Alice >> >> >> >> Views expressed are personal and not a reflection >> of any organisation/institution - am affiliated with. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: John Walubengo <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> >> >> >> >> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 23:51:14 >> >> To: <alice(a)apc.org> >> >> Cc: skunk<skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>; >> <ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net>; KICTAnet >> KICTAnet<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] >> Breaking News: Kenyan Internet >> >> ? ? ? ?Community comes face to face with new >> Legislation >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Alex - I am NOT ?against competition. It is good >> for the industry. ?The problem is how such competition is >> introduced. ?Yes, KENIC has had a monopoly over the .KE >> namespace, but at least it is(was?) a Multistakeholder >> Partnership in its legal formation. ?If this partnership >> was NOT exercised adequately for the benefit of the >> community it should be fixed rather than move the rights of >> the .KE namespace to with due respect -just one of the >> stakeholders (Govt/Regulator), however strong they are. >> >> >> >> The idea and law specifying that the regulator is >> ONLY going to regulate the 2nd level domain is to me >> mischievious /grey area and I shared the same feelings at >> the KENIC AGM. ?This is because the money/action/activities >> of ICT lie at the 2nd level! >> >> >> >> Claiming that the regulation is not touching the >> top level .KE but the lower level is similar to and I quote >> one of the members "telling a parent that you wont >> regulate him/her but his/her kids will be totally under 3rd >> party control". >> >> >> >> walu. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --- On Fri, 5/8/09, Alex Gakuru >> <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> >> >>> Subject: Re: [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: >> Kenyan Internet Community comes ?face to face with new >> Legislation >> >>> To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com >> >>> Cc: ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >> >>> Date: Friday, May 8, 2009, 10:55 PM >> >>> Walu, >> >>> >> >>> Thank you for the info although I find it >> bordering on >> >>> alarmist;) >> >>> >> >>> I deliberately boycotted today's Kenic AGM >> because, >> >>> among others, >> >>> kenic folks decided they will not post to this >> list minutes >> >>> of last >> >>> year's AGM resolutions, such as, >> constitutional change >> >>> made to allow >> >>> an a certain individual's term of office >> to be extended >> >>> beyond what >> >>> the constitution allowed. There are a couple >> of complaints >> >>> I >> >>> restrained myself from posting onlist. >> >>> >> >>> Background: >> >>> >> >>> During last year's AGM the said >> "Internet >> >>> Community" for the second >> >>> (or third?) year running repeatedly complained >> about >> >>> kenic's failure >> >>> to lower .ke domain prices as frustrating .ke >> domains >> >>> growth. >> >>> Registrars we later hurriedly called to a >> meeting at the >> >>> Grand Hotel >> >>> and we were asked to volunteer ourselves to a >> committee >> >>> that would >> >>> look into domain price issue. To the best of >> my knowledge >> >>> information >> >>> and belief no such meeting has ever been >> called, to-date. >> >>> >> >>> At today's 10,133 domain numbers >> statistics ( CO.KE 9, >> >>> 465 ?NE.KE 14, >> >>> OR.KE ?654) >> >>> >> see:<http://www.kenic.or.ke/statistics.html> kenic >> >>> annual >> >>> domains selling income exceeds kenya shillings >> 20 million >> >>> every year - >> >>> while Internet consumers continue screaming >> "lower >> >>> domain prices!" to >> >>> seemingly deaf ears and half-hearted Kenyan >> domain space >> >>> (.ke) >> >>> administrator. >> >>> >> >>> They fail to see the bigger picture. By >> lowering domain >> >>> prices they >> >>> would have very many more being able to afford >> local >> >>> domain. >> >>> >> >>> Lets face it, shillings 20 million is not >> kidogo money >> >>> without >> >>> necessarily dwelling on the fact that many of >> their staff >> >>> are interns >> >>> ( Aren't permanent staff only 4?) I >> suppose Board >> >>> members do not draw >> >>> salaries? Again, really whom does the Kenic >> Board answer >> >>> to/ i.e.holds >> >>> them accountable? Only to themselves with >> ceremonial AGMs? >> >>> >> >>> The Law: >> >>> >> >>> Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act, 2008 >> states: >> >>> >> >>> Section 83F: Licence for country code >> top-level domain >> >>> >> >>> "The Commission [CCK] may, upon >> application in the >> >>> prescribed manner >> >>> and subject to such conditions as it may deem >> necessary, >> >>> grant >> >>> licences under this section authorizing a >> person to >> >>> administer a >> >>> sub-domain in the country top-level >> domain" >> >>> >> >>> What's wrong with CCK granting licenses >> to, for example >> >>> 3 or 4 (legal) >> >>> persons to compete in offering the best-priced >> domains to >> >>> Kenyans >> >>> consumers? >> >>> >> >>> Conclusion: >> >>> >> >>> Kenic attracted the competition which perhaps >> might have >> >>> been avoided >> >>> if they had listened to the "Internet >> Community" >> >>> cries over the year. >> >>> I note that you refer to kenic as >> "partnership." >> >>> Licence conditions >> >>> could include all others be representative >> partnerships and >> >>> PPP >> >>> 'problem' solved;) ?What I am trying >> to say is that >> >>> kenic should not >> >>> be viewed as the only PPP model possible.. >> ICANN does not >> >>> break >> >>> national laws and in any case, note how many >> registries >> >>> exist in the >> >>> US itself. Our market has matured and we need >> competition >> >>> in the >> >>> domain space area also, Yes/No? >> >>> >> >>> My take is kenic's honeymoon ended when >> the law opened >> >>> domain pricing >> >>> competition space that should lower prices- >> good for >> >>> consumers but bad >> >>> for old kenic 'monopoly era' ;) >> >>> >> >>> In other words, we do not have a crisis so let >> us not make >> >>> one up. >> >>> >> >>> Regards, >> >>> >> >>> Alex >> >>> --- >> >>> References >> >>> 1. Boosting numbers in .ke domain names >> >>> >> <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9451&Item…> >> >>> >> >>> 2. Kenyans to enjoy reduced charges for >> acquiring Internet >> >>> domains >> >>> >> <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8270&Item…> >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:12 PM, John Walubengo >> >>> <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > Apologies for cross-posting: >> >>> > >> >>> > It took a KENIC (KEnya Network >> Information Center, >> >>> www.kenic.or.ke) Annual General Meeting for >> the Kenyan >> >>> Internet community to digest the implication >> of the a Kenyan >> >>> ICT Legislation passed more than five months >> ago. ?The law >> >>> which included sections that touched on the >> Media, IT, >> >>> Telecommunication and Postal Services has >> faced stiff >> >>> resistance from the Media fraternity while the >> Internet >> >>> Community kept a low if not a dead profile. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > It was at the KENIC general meeting held >> today in >> >>> Nairobi that the Internet Community grappled >> with the >> >>> implication of the IT section on the operation >> of the .KE >> >>> namespace. ?The law specifies that all second >> level .KE >> >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the >> country's >> >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission >> of Kenya. >> >>> ?The law requires that all Registries - those >> who manage >> >>> the internet domains - must apply for a >> license by the 2nd >> >>> of June 2009. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > KENIC, a public-private-partnership has >> under the >> >>> ICANN Policies been managing the .KE namespace >> including the >> >>> 2nd level sub-domains such as xyz.CO.KE, >> xyz.OR.KE, etc. >> >>> From 2nd June 2009, KENIC must seek permission >> from the >> >>> Regulator to continue managing these >> sub-domains. ?In an >> >>> effort to comply with the law, the KENIC Board >> requested the >> >>> community to support a resolution that a new >> legal entity >> >>> (Special Purpose Vehicle, SPV) be created in >> order to apply >> >>> for the license from the Regulator as well as >> compete with >> >>> other potential entities that are set to fight >> in that >> >>> space. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > The proposals opened up heated >> discussions with some >> >>> members wondering if KENIC was ceding its >> hard-won rights >> >>> & control over the .KE namespace to an >> exclusive and >> >>> single entity. ?The current governance >> structure for KENIC >> >>> provides for a Multistakeholder Partnership >> over the whole >> >>> .KE namespace and has the Govt, Academia, >> Private >> >>> Sector/Telcos and Civil Society Board >> Representation that is >> >>> wholly accountable to Internet Users during >> Annual General >> >>> Meetings. ?Effectively, the new law takes >> part of this >> >>> mandate and places it under one or two of >> these Stakeholders >> >>> that is the Regulator/Govt. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > Members wondered about the criteria that >> would be used >> >>> by the Regulator to award the management >> licenses to various >> >>> competitors. Others wondered about the >> potential conflict >> >>> between the local legislation and the ICANN >> policies given >> >>> that KENIC has currently been operating under >> ICANN policies >> >>> but now has to take cognizance of the local >> law. ?For >> >>> example, if the Regulator granted a license to >> someone else >> >>> to manage the "co.ke" subdomain BUT >> the local >> >>> internet community for one reason or the other >> instructed >> >>> the KENIC Board NOT to accept and transfer the >> delegation >> >>> from KENIC how would that be resolved? And yet >> other members >> >>> wondered to what extend the proposed SPV would >> cannibalize >> >>> their existing markets and services. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > It has taken five months of silence but >> clearly, the >> >>> Kenyan Internet community is just beginning to >> understand >> >>> and feel the heat of some sections in the ICT >> law that had >> >>> previously been hijacked and labeled >> "Media law" >> >>> at the expense of IT practitioners. ?It will >> be interesting >> >>> to see how this plays out before and after the >> 2nd of June >> >>> 2009 - the date when all subdomain managers >> must be licensed >> >>> by the Regulator. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > walu >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >>_______________________________________________ >> >>> > ke-internetusers mailing list >> >>> > ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >> >>> > >> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >> kictanet mailing list >> >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> >> >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> >> >> This message was sent to: alice(a)apc.org >> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >> ke-internetusers mailing list >> >> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >> >> >> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >> >> >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > This message was sent to: wanjira(a)cck.go.ke > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wanjira%40cck.go.ke > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:51:32 -0230 > From: Solomon Mburu <solo.mburu(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes > faceto face with new Legislation > To: wanjira(a)cck.go.ke > Cc: skunk <skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>, ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net, Kenya ICT > Policy - kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Message-ID: > <98099ee50905110521r50dbbd92s3660e87de6b8f842(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I also buy Walu's argument. A meeting of the players in this sector > need to be convened ASAP. Why, could be a question, did it take KENIC, > 3 months to realize the clauses affect TLDs in Kenya, which will > effectively be effected just three months away? The SPV, which KENIC > is proposing is handy but we might end up burying heads under the > sand. Let us face the facts albeit with an open mind. The law is real > running after the law breaker and so there is a need to be focussed in > matters promoting our very own .ke without politicizing issues. > Solomon > > On 11/05/2009, wanjira(a)cck.go.ke <wanjira(a)cck.go.ke> wrote: >> Thanks Walu indeed a meeting to discuss the interpretations/ >> implementation >> would be worthwhile at this point. >> >> Best >> Alice >> Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone from Zain Kenya >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Walubengo <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> >> >> Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 02:32:39 >> To: <wanjira(a)cck.go.ke> >> Cc: skunk<skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>; <ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net>; Kenya ICT >> Policy - kictanet<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes >> face >> to face with new Legislation >> >> >> >> Alex, Alice et. al. >> >> 1stly, I wish to state that the views I expressed in the email were my >> personal interpretation of the KCA Act 2009 with regard to domain >> registration. I do still stand by them - but if they caused misleading >> alarm/crisis - i do not think that it was the intention and motivation >> of >> the KENIC Board (of which I am NOT a member and therefore not authorised >> to >> speak on their behalf). So if the KENIC Board needs to resign, they >> should >> do so for another reason rather than my e-mail. >> >> 2ndly, I get the feeling from several reactions on this issue that we >> have >> mixed Governance Issues (who and how the .KE namespace is controlled) >> with >> Operational issues (how KENIC has so far been managing the .KE >> namespace). >> >> 3rdly, I agree (with Alex) that the confusion so created can no longer >> be >> solved online and somebody must convene a meeting for all stakeholders >> to be >> able to read from the same page. Obviously KENIC and CCK (the regulator) >> must take lead on this because to me they are immediately affected by >> the >> turn of events. The rest of us (Users) are likely to feel the impact >> months/years later... >> >> 4thly, such a meeting can only be productive if the following is availed >> in >> advance: >> >> 1) The Regulator gives direction on what critereon they will use to >> distribute the control of this 2nd level namespace to competing bidders >> (e.g. First-come First- serve?, Auction (highest-bidder) method?, >> Politically correct methods? amongst many others) >> >> 2) The Regulator gives a roadmap of how they intend to manage the >> technical >> relationship between the local top-level domain (.KE) and the >> subsequently >> licensed private players at the 2nd subdomain levels. My position still >> remains that you cannot purport to control the 2nd layer without >> implicitly >> controlling the top layer - otherwise you set yourself up for a future >> "technical disobedience" from the top layer. Which in turn means that >> the >> Regulator has to (will?) eventually find a way to control both the Top >> and >> 2nd levels domains. >> >> 3) KENIC gives direction on how the Internet Community will benefit from >> this new dispensation. And yes the SPV route did raise more questions >> than >> answers and so maybe by then, we would have more answers than the >> questions. >> >> I wish to rest my case on this issue until such a time when the >> face2face >> meeting is convened. If it is not - then I guess we just have to wait >> and >> see as the events unfold. Unlike our media friends - we (IT) do not >> control >> the airwaves and worse still our subject is more "esoteric than >> sensational" >> to use the words of one leading Editor and so the wananchi will be >> wondering >> "whose goat has been eaten and by who". >> >> walu. >> >> --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> >>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: Kenyan >>> InternetCommunity comes face to face with new Legislation >>> To: alice(a)apc.org >>> Cc: jwalu(a)yahoo.com, ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 10:09 AM >>> Walubengo, >>> >>> An important correction and note: >>> >>> Section 83F uses discretionary word "may" not >>> obligatory "shall" this >>> below statement is factually incorrect. >>> >>> "The law specifies that all second level .KE >>> >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the >>> country's >>> >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission >>> of Kenya." >>> >>> Has CCK has expressly stated intention to require registry >>> to be >>> licensed? Was CCK letter to kenic shown at the meeting? >>> >>> The tradition is for the regulator to first publish/call a >>> meeting for >>> *all* would-be affected sector stakeholders (kenic, >>> registrars, and >>> ISP in this case). >>> >>> Kenic should stop making-up a 'crisis'; rushing to >>> register 'SPV', >>> project urgency approval, than circulate emails to various >>> mailing >>> lists. >>> >>> Registering the SPV is dead as a dodo. full stop. Wasahau. >>> And at this >>> rate should some or all board members consider resigning >>> for >>> misleading the "Internet Community"? >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Alex Gakuru >>> <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Title: Section 83F ?"License for country code >>> top-level domain" >>> > >>> > Body: "The Commission may, upon application in >>> the prescribed manner >>> > and subject to such conditions as it may deem >>> necessary, grant >>> > licenses under this section authorizing a person to >>> administer a >>> > sub-domain in the country code top-level domain." >>> > >>> > Opinion: >>> > >>> > a) The title implies License for country code >>> top-level domain" hence >>> > kenic and/or others may apply for country code >>> top-level domain >>> > licence >>> > >>> > b) kenic administers "sub-domain in the country >>> code top-level domain" >>> > registrars merely ?*registers* NOT administer >>> sub-domains, unless you >>> > are suggesting that hosting is part of >>> "administering" a domain thus >>> > "to host a .ke domain one needs a licence?" >>> > >>> > c) Lord forbid your interpretation that retail >>> registrars need a >>> > licence from CCK be correct. For if so I fear that >>> will be last death >>> > blow to the remaining .ke public goodwill. Registrars >>> already pay >>> > annual amounts to kenic and additional >>> 'licence' fees burden would >>> > discourage them marketing .ke. and their clients would >>> understand .com >>> > cost savings. Many (including those not kenic >>> registrars) presently >>> > just recommend .com,,, anyway. >>> > >>> > d) if in the current situation where kenic is having >>> difficulties >>> > efficiently serving existing registrars, would you >>> expect these >>> > registrars to agree to additional "Licenced >>> fee" atop already very >>> > costly kenic domain prices (compared to .com) >>> > >>> > e) If kenic board just wanted to form some SPV (btw, >>> who are the >>> > shareholders?) to compete with poor registrars at the >>> retail level, >>> > rest assured that then *they* will be left selling .ke >>> alone - giving >>> > themselves all the discounts you want, completely >>> eradicating >>> > registrars competition - i.e. strengthen kenic >>> monopoly grip on domain >>> > pricing not introduce competition any where.. >>> > >>> > f) Valid claims of increasing competition can only be >>> genuine if >>> > Section 83F heading is interpreted to mean other >>> registries are >>> > allowed and those few registries pay licence fee to >>> CCK. Those >>> > registries stand to better represent various >>> Nationally-dispersed >>> > "Internet Communities" members, that private >>> "SPV" company. BTW, what >>> > is the present kenic company-type as is registered by >>> Companies >>> > Registrar? >>> > >>> > g) Should above come (f) bring about private-public >>> interest conflict, >>> > I would then suppose that the spirit to protect of >>> public interest >>> > over private interest ?on National ICT Policy clause >>> "7.1 .... In the >>> > event of conflict, public interest shall >>> prevail." swings into action? >>> > >>> > h) Finally Alice, you sit at both Kenic and CCK >>> boards. You have had >>> > the duty to inform both of them and openly report back >>> to everyone on >>> > the consequences. Je, ulifanya hivyo??? >>> > >>> > regards, >>> > >>> > >>> > Alex >>> > >>> > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:42 PM, alice munyua >>> <alice(a)apc.org> wrote: >>> >> There seems to be some ?misunderstanding ?about >>> what the KCA 2009 ?does? >>> >> >>> >> It is the introduction of liberalisation at >>> >> the sub domain level by creating a >>> >> competitive registrar model? ?KENIC remains the >>> ccTLD manager of the whole dot KE namespace and >>> >> registry operator. What the KCA ammendment does >>> only means if a registered company wants to manage/sell the >>> second level, i.e. .co.ke, .sc.ke etc. they would need to >>> get a ?license from CCK to become an registarar. >>> >> This is encouraging competition at the sub domain >>> level and from my interpretation that is progress.. >>> >> Best >>> >> Alice >>> >> >>> >> Views expressed are personal and not a reflection >>> of any organisation/institution - am affiliated with. >>> >> >>> >> -----Original Message----- >>> >> From: John Walubengo <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> >>> >> >>> >> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 23:51:14 >>> >> To: <alice(a)apc.org> >>> >> Cc: skunk<skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>; >>> <ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net>; KICTAnet >>> KICTAnet<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >>> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] >>> Breaking News: Kenyan Internet >>> >> ? ? ? ?Community comes face to face with new >>> Legislation >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Alex - I am NOT ?against competition. It is good >>> for the industry. ?The problem is how such competition is >>> introduced. ?Yes, KENIC has had a monopoly over the .KE >>> namespace, but at least it is(was?) a Multistakeholder >>> Partnership in its legal formation. ?If this partnership >>> was NOT exercised adequately for the benefit of the >>> community it should be fixed rather than move the rights of >>> the .KE namespace to with due respect -just one of the >>> stakeholders (Govt/Regulator), however strong they are. >>> >> >>> >> The idea and law specifying that the regulator is >>> ONLY going to regulate the 2nd level domain is to me >>> mischievious /grey area and I shared the same feelings at >>> the KENIC AGM. ?This is because the money/action/activities >>> of ICT lie at the 2nd level! >>> >> >>> >> Claiming that the regulation is not touching the >>> top level .KE but the lower level is similar to and I quote >>> one of the members "telling a parent that you wont >>> regulate him/her but his/her kids will be totally under 3rd >>> party control". >>> >> >>> >> walu. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> --- On Fri, 5/8/09, Alex Gakuru >>> <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> >>> >>> Subject: Re: [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: >>> Kenyan Internet Community comes ?face to face with new >>> Legislation >>> >>> To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com >>> >>> Cc: ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> >>> Date: Friday, May 8, 2009, 10:55 PM >>> >>> Walu, >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you for the info although I find it >>> bordering on >>> >>> alarmist;) >>> >>> >>> >>> I deliberately boycotted today's Kenic AGM >>> because, >>> >>> among others, >>> >>> kenic folks decided they will not post to this >>> list minutes >>> >>> of last >>> >>> year's AGM resolutions, such as, >>> constitutional change >>> >>> made to allow >>> >>> an a certain individual's term of office >>> to be extended >>> >>> beyond what >>> >>> the constitution allowed. There are a couple >>> of complaints >>> >>> I >>> >>> restrained myself from posting onlist. >>> >>> >>> >>> Background: >>> >>> >>> >>> During last year's AGM the said >>> "Internet >>> >>> Community" for the second >>> >>> (or third?) year running repeatedly complained >>> about >>> >>> kenic's failure >>> >>> to lower .ke domain prices as frustrating .ke >>> domains >>> >>> growth. >>> >>> Registrars we later hurriedly called to a >>> meeting at the >>> >>> Grand Hotel >>> >>> and we were asked to volunteer ourselves to a >>> committee >>> >>> that would >>> >>> look into domain price issue. To the best of >>> my knowledge >>> >>> information >>> >>> and belief no such meeting has ever been >>> called, to-date. >>> >>> >>> >>> At today's 10,133 domain numbers >>> statistics ( CO.KE 9, >>> >>> 465 ?NE.KE 14, >>> >>> OR.KE ?654) >>> >>> >>> see:<http://www.kenic.or.ke/statistics.html> kenic >>> >>> annual >>> >>> domains selling income exceeds kenya shillings >>> 20 million >>> >>> every year - >>> >>> while Internet consumers continue screaming >>> "lower >>> >>> domain prices!" to >>> >>> seemingly deaf ears and half-hearted Kenyan >>> domain space >>> >>> (.ke) >>> >>> administrator. >>> >>> >>> >>> They fail to see the bigger picture. By >>> lowering domain >>> >>> prices they >>> >>> would have very many more being able to afford >>> local >>> >>> domain. >>> >>> >>> >>> Lets face it, shillings 20 million is not >>> kidogo money >>> >>> without >>> >>> necessarily dwelling on the fact that many of >>> their staff >>> >>> are interns >>> >>> ( Aren't permanent staff only 4?) I >>> suppose Board >>> >>> members do not draw >>> >>> salaries? Again, really whom does the Kenic >>> Board answer >>> >>> to/ i.e.holds >>> >>> them accountable? Only to themselves with >>> ceremonial AGMs? >>> >>> >>> >>> The Law: >>> >>> >>> >>> Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act, 2008 >>> states: >>> >>> >>> >>> Section 83F: Licence for country code >>> top-level domain >>> >>> >>> >>> "The Commission [CCK] may, upon >>> application in the >>> >>> prescribed manner >>> >>> and subject to such conditions as it may deem >>> necessary, >>> >>> grant >>> >>> licences under this section authorizing a >>> person to >>> >>> administer a >>> >>> sub-domain in the country top-level >>> domain" >>> >>> >>> >>> What's wrong with CCK granting licenses >>> to, for example >>> >>> 3 or 4 (legal) >>> >>> persons to compete in offering the best-priced >>> domains to >>> >>> Kenyans >>> >>> consumers? >>> >>> >>> >>> Conclusion: >>> >>> >>> >>> Kenic attracted the competition which perhaps >>> might have >>> >>> been avoided >>> >>> if they had listened to the "Internet >>> Community" >>> >>> cries over the year. >>> >>> I note that you refer to kenic as >>> "partnership." >>> >>> Licence conditions >>> >>> could include all others be representative >>> partnerships and >>> >>> PPP >>> >>> 'problem' solved;) ?What I am trying >>> to say is that >>> >>> kenic should not >>> >>> be viewed as the only PPP model possible.. >>> ICANN does not >>> >>> break >>> >>> national laws and in any case, note how many >>> registries >>> >>> exist in the >>> >>> US itself. Our market has matured and we need >>> competition >>> >>> in the >>> >>> domain space area also, Yes/No? >>> >>> >>> >>> My take is kenic's honeymoon ended when >>> the law opened >>> >>> domain pricing >>> >>> competition space that should lower prices- >>> good for >>> >>> consumers but bad >>> >>> for old kenic 'monopoly era' ;) >>> >>> >>> >>> In other words, we do not have a crisis so let >>> us not make >>> >>> one up. >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> --- >>> >>> References >>> >>> 1. Boosting numbers in .ke domain names >>> >>> >>> <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9451&Item…> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2. Kenyans to enjoy reduced charges for >>> acquiring Internet >>> >>> domains >>> >>> >>> <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8270&Item…> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:12 PM, John Walubengo >>> >>> <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Apologies for cross-posting: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > It took a KENIC (KEnya Network >>> Information Center, >>> >>> www.kenic.or.ke) Annual General Meeting for >>> the Kenyan >>> >>> Internet community to digest the implication >>> of the a Kenyan >>> >>> ICT Legislation passed more than five months >>> ago. ?The law >>> >>> which included sections that touched on the >>> Media, IT, >>> >>> Telecommunication and Postal Services has >>> faced stiff >>> >>> resistance from the Media fraternity while the >>> Internet >>> >>> Community kept a low if not a dead profile. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > It was at the KENIC general meeting held >>> today in >>> >>> Nairobi that the Internet Community grappled >>> with the >>> >>> implication of the IT section on the operation >>> of the .KE >>> >>> namespace. ?The law specifies that all second >>> level .KE >>> >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the >>> country's >>> >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission >>> of Kenya. >>> >>> ?The law requires that all Registries - those >>> who manage >>> >>> the internet domains - must apply for a >>> license by the 2nd >>> >>> of June 2009. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > KENIC, a public-private-partnership has >>> under the >>> >>> ICANN Policies been managing the .KE namespace >>> including the >>> >>> 2nd level sub-domains such as xyz.CO.KE, >>> xyz.OR.KE, etc. >>> >>> From 2nd June 2009, KENIC must seek permission >>> from the >>> >>> Regulator to continue managing these >>> sub-domains. ?In an >>> >>> effort to comply with the law, the KENIC Board >>> requested the >>> >>> community to support a resolution that a new >>> legal entity >>> >>> (Special Purpose Vehicle, SPV) be created in >>> order to apply >>> >>> for the license from the Regulator as well as >>> compete with >>> >>> other potential entities that are set to fight >>> in that >>> >>> space. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > The proposals opened up heated >>> discussions with some >>> >>> members wondering if KENIC was ceding its >>> hard-won rights >>> >>> & control over the .KE namespace to an >>> exclusive and >>> >>> single entity. ?The current governance >>> structure for KENIC >>> >>> provides for a Multistakeholder Partnership >>> over the whole >>> >>> .KE namespace and has the Govt, Academia, >>> Private >>> >>> Sector/Telcos and Civil Society Board >>> Representation that is >>> >>> wholly accountable to Internet Users during >>> Annual General >>> >>> Meetings. ?Effectively, the new law takes >>> part of this >>> >>> mandate and places it under one or two of >>> these Stakeholders >>> >>> that is the Regulator/Govt. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Members wondered about the criteria that >>> would be used >>> >>> by the Regulator to award the management >>> licenses to various >>> >>> competitors. Others wondered about the >>> potential conflict >>> >>> between the local legislation and the ICANN >>> policies given >>> >>> that KENIC has currently been operating under >>> ICANN policies >>> >>> but now has to take cognizance of the local >>> law. ?For >>> >>> example, if the Regulator granted a license to >>> someone else >>> >>> to manage the "co.ke" subdomain BUT >>> the local >>> >>> internet community for one reason or the other >>> instructed >>> >>> the KENIC Board NOT to accept and transfer the >>> delegation >>> >>> from KENIC how would that be resolved? And yet >>> other members >>> >>> wondered to what extend the proposed SPV would >>> cannibalize >>> >>> their existing markets and services. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > It has taken five months of silence but >>> clearly, the >>> >>> Kenyan Internet community is just beginning to >>> understand >>> >>> and feel the heat of some sections in the ICT >>> law that had >>> >>> previously been hijacked and labeled >>> "Media law" >>> >>> at the expense of IT practitioners. ?It will >>> be interesting >>> >>> to see how this plays out before and after the >>> 2nd of June >>> >>> 2009 - the date when all subdomain managers >>> must be licensed >>> >>> by the Regulator. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > walu >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ >>> >>> > ke-internetusers mailing list >>> >>> > ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> >>> > >>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>> >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >> kictanet mailing list >>> >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>> >> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>> >> >>> >> This message was sent to: alice(a)apc.org >>> >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org >>> >> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>> >> ke-internetusers mailing list >>> >> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> >> >>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: wanjira(a)cck.go.ke >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wanjira%40cck.go.ke >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: solo.mburu(a)gmail.com >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/solo.mburu%40gmail.com >> > > > -- > Man is a gregarious animal and enjoys agreement as cows will graze all > the same way to the side of a hill! > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > > End of kictanet Digest, Vol 24, Issue 35 > **************************************** >

3 2

IG Discussion 2009: Closure
by mwende njiraini 12 May '09

12 May '09

Good morning, I would like to take this opportunity to *thank you* all for the valuable contributions to the Internet Governance (IG) online discussions in the last 11 days. All contributions will be consolidated in a draft report and forwarded for your consideration and information as soon as possible. Kind regards Mwende

2 1

Re: [kictanet] [AfrICANN-discuss] Re: kenya amendment act and KENIC
by alice munyua 11 May '09

11 May '09

Its about consumer protection, legitimate companies operating in that area, encouraging new entrepreneurs etc Best Alice ------Original Message------ From: Calvin Browne Sender: africann-bounces(a)afrinic.net To: africann(a)afrinic.net ReplyTo: africann(a)afrinic.net Subject: Re: [AfrICANN-discuss] Re: kenya amendment act and KENIC Sent: May 11, 2009 2:43 PM On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 11:05 +0000, alice munyua wrote: > There seems to be some misunderstanding about what the kenya communication amendment act 2009 (KCA 2009) and what it proposes to introduce, which is basically the era of convergence. > > It is the introduction of liberalisation at > the sub domain level by creating a > competitive registrar model. KENIC remains the ccTLD manager of the whole dot KE namespace and > registry operator. What the KCA ammendment requires is if a registered company wants to manage/sell the second level, i.e. .co.ke, sc.ke etc. they would need to get a license from CCK to become an registarar. > This is encouraging competition at the sub domain level and from my interpretation that is progress..there has been a discussion on some lists that the government takes on a larger than life oversight role, this is not correct and please note that the regulatory authority CCK has always been a major stakeholder in KENIC > > Best > Alice Alice, Thanks for the clarification - there is always lots of ambiguity when it comes to interpreting legislation and the effects thereof. I'm curious - how does placing a barrier to entry (the requirement to get a licence) encourage competition? Sincerely --Calvin _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN(a)afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann

1 0

Re: [kictanet] IG Discussion 2009, Day 9 of 10 - National Cybersecurity strategies
by mwende njiraini 11 May '09

11 May '09

Morning, Reference to email below - you may wish to make reference to the following additional resources - One more CERT in Africa: Mauritius Gets Computer Emergency Response Team - http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/146123/mauritius_gets_compute… - CERT is located at Carnegie Mellon University, involved in Internet security vunerabilities, long term network changes research: http://www.cert.org/ - Team Cymru is a specialized Internet security research firm : http://www.team-cymru.org/ - FIRST is the global Forum for Incident Response and Security Teams: http://www.first.org/ Kind regards Mwende Please note the change in the subject line today is IG Discussion 2009,*Day 9 of 10 * *Disclaimer: Views expressed here (except those quoted or referenced) are the author’s own* On 5/7/09, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Good morning, > > > > Today we have the opportunity of discussing the last aspect of > cybersecurity: Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs)/Computer > Emergency Response Teams (CERT). CSIRTs/CERTs are responsible for preparing > for, detecting, managing and responding to cybersecurity incidents as well > as creating consumer awareness. > > > > Global cybersecurity is said to be ‘as strong as the weakest link’. Developing > countries particularly in Africa have not sufficiently addressed > cybersecurity issues. While some countries have initiated efforts to > develop cybersecurity capabilities through the establishment of National > CSIRTs/CERTs, the CERT-TCC in Tunisia is the only active national CERT in > Africa (http://www.ansi.tn/en/about_cert-tcc.htm) > > > > In establishing a National CERT/CSIRT… > > - What structure could be adopted? > - What services should be offered? > - What elements could be considered to establish trust in this > institution thereby encouraging organizations with critical information > infrastructure (CII) such as government agencies, banks, educational > institutions, water and power companies, etc, to share of cybersecurity > incidents? > > > > Kind regards > > Mwende > > *Disclaimer: Views expressed here (except those quoted or referenced) are > the author’s own* >

9 14

Re: [kictanet] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes face to face with new Legislation
by John Walubengo 11 May '09

11 May '09

Alex, Alice et. al. 1stly, I wish to state that the views I expressed in the email were my personal interpretation of the KCA Act 2009 with regard to domain registration. I do still stand by them - but if they caused misleading alarm/crisis - i do not think that it was the intention and motivation of the KENIC Board (of which I am NOT a member and therefore not authorised to speak on their behalf). So if the KENIC Board needs to resign, they should do so for another reason rather than my e-mail. 2ndly, I get the feeling from several reactions on this issue that we have mixed Governance Issues (who and how the .KE namespace is controlled) with Operational issues (how KENIC has so far been managing the .KE namespace). 3rdly, I agree (with Alex) that the confusion so created can no longer be solved online and somebody must convene a meeting for all stakeholders to be able to read from the same page. Obviously KENIC and CCK (the regulator) must take lead on this because to me they are immediately affected by the turn of events. The rest of us (Users) are likely to feel the impact months/years later... 4thly, such a meeting can only be productive if the following is availed in advance: 1) The Regulator gives direction on what critereon they will use to distribute the control of this 2nd level namespace to competing bidders (e.g. First-come First- serve?, Auction (highest-bidder) method?, Politically correct methods? amongst many others) 2) The Regulator gives a roadmap of how they intend to manage the technical relationship between the local top-level domain (.KE) and the subsequently licensed private players at the 2nd subdomain levels. My position still remains that you cannot purport to control the 2nd layer without implicitly controlling the top layer - otherwise you set yourself up for a future "technical disobedience" from the top layer. Which in turn means that the Regulator has to (will?) eventually find a way to control both the Top and 2nd levels domains. 3) KENIC gives direction on how the Internet Community will benefit from this new dispensation. And yes the SPV route did raise more questions than answers and so maybe by then, we would have more answers than the questions. I wish to rest my case on this issue until such a time when the face2face meeting is convened. If it is not - then I guess we just have to wait and see as the events unfold. Unlike our media friends - we (IT) do not control the airwaves and worse still our subject is more "esoteric than sensational" to use the words of one leading Editor and so the wananchi will be wondering "whose goat has been eaten and by who". walu. --- On Mon, 5/11/09, Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: Kenyan InternetCommunity comes face to face with new Legislation > To: alice(a)apc.org > Cc: jwalu(a)yahoo.com, ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 10:09 AM > Walubengo, > > An important correction and note: > > Section 83F uses discretionary word "may" not > obligatory "shall" this > below statement is factually incorrect. > > "The law specifies that all second level .KE > >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the > country's > >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission > of Kenya." > > Has CCK has expressly stated intention to require registry > to be > licensed? Was CCK letter to kenic shown at the meeting? > > The tradition is for the regulator to first publish/call a > meeting for > *all* would-be affected sector stakeholders (kenic, > registrars, and > ISP in this case). > > Kenic should stop making-up a 'crisis'; rushing to > register 'SPV', > project urgency approval, than circulate emails to various > mailing > lists. > > Registering the SPV is dead as a dodo. full stop. Wasahau. > And at this > rate should some or all board members consider resigning > for > misleading the "Internet Community"? > > Alex > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Alex Gakuru > <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Title: Section 83F "License for country code > top-level domain" > > > > Body: "The Commission may, upon application in > the prescribed manner > > and subject to such conditions as it may deem > necessary, grant > > licenses under this section authorizing a person to > administer a > > sub-domain in the country code top-level domain." > > > > Opinion: > > > > a) The title implies License for country code > top-level domain" hence > > kenic and/or others may apply for country code > top-level domain > > licence > > > > b) kenic administers "sub-domain in the country > code top-level domain" > > registrars merely *registers* NOT administer > sub-domains, unless you > > are suggesting that hosting is part of > "administering" a domain thus > > "to host a .ke domain one needs a licence?" > > > > c) Lord forbid your interpretation that retail > registrars need a > > licence from CCK be correct. For if so I fear that > will be last death > > blow to the remaining .ke public goodwill. Registrars > already pay > > annual amounts to kenic and additional > 'licence' fees burden would > > discourage them marketing .ke. and their clients would > understand .com > > cost savings. Many (including those not kenic > registrars) presently > > just recommend .com,,, anyway. > > > > d) if in the current situation where kenic is having > difficulties > > efficiently serving existing registrars, would you > expect these > > registrars to agree to additional "Licenced > fee" atop already very > > costly kenic domain prices (compared to .com) > > > > e) If kenic board just wanted to form some SPV (btw, > who are the > > shareholders?) to compete with poor registrars at the > retail level, > > rest assured that then *they* will be left selling .ke > alone - giving > > themselves all the discounts you want, completely > eradicating > > registrars competition - i.e. strengthen kenic > monopoly grip on domain > > pricing not introduce competition any where.. > > > > f) Valid claims of increasing competition can only be > genuine if > > Section 83F heading is interpreted to mean other > registries are > > allowed and those few registries pay licence fee to > CCK. Those > > registries stand to better represent various > Nationally-dispersed > > "Internet Communities" members, that private > "SPV" company. BTW, what > > is the present kenic company-type as is registered by > Companies > > Registrar? > > > > g) Should above come (f) bring about private-public > interest conflict, > > I would then suppose that the spirit to protect of > public interest > > over private interest on National ICT Policy clause > "7.1 .... In the > > event of conflict, public interest shall > prevail." swings into action? > > > > h) Finally Alice, you sit at both Kenic and CCK > boards. You have had > > the duty to inform both of them and openly report back > to everyone on > > the consequences. Je, ulifanya hivyo??? > > > > regards, > > > > > > Alex > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:42 PM, alice munyua > <alice(a)apc.org> wrote: > >> There seems to be some misunderstanding about > what the KCA 2009 does? > >> > >> It is the introduction of liberalisation at > >> the sub domain level by creating a > >> competitive registrar model? KENIC remains the > ccTLD manager of the whole dot KE namespace and > >> registry operator. What the KCA ammendment does > only means if a registered company wants to manage/sell the > second level, i.e. .co.ke, .sc.ke etc. they would need to > get a license from CCK to become an registarar. > >> This is encouraging competition at the sub domain > level and from my interpretation that is progress.. > >> Best > >> Alice > >> > >> Views expressed are personal and not a reflection > of any organisation/institution - am affiliated with. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: John Walubengo <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> > >> > >> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 23:51:14 > >> To: <alice(a)apc.org> > >> Cc: skunk<skunkworks(a)my.co.ke>; > <ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net>; KICTAnet > KICTAnet<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] > Breaking News: Kenyan Internet > >> Community comes face to face with new > Legislation > >> > >> > >> > >> Alex - I am NOT against competition. It is good > for the industry. The problem is how such competition is > introduced. Yes, KENIC has had a monopoly over the .KE > namespace, but at least it is(was?) a Multistakeholder > Partnership in its legal formation. If this partnership > was NOT exercised adequately for the benefit of the > community it should be fixed rather than move the rights of > the .KE namespace to with due respect -just one of the > stakeholders (Govt/Regulator), however strong they are. > >> > >> The idea and law specifying that the regulator is > ONLY going to regulate the 2nd level domain is to me > mischievious /grey area and I shared the same feelings at > the KENIC AGM. This is because the money/action/activities > of ICT lie at the 2nd level! > >> > >> Claiming that the regulation is not touching the > top level .KE but the lower level is similar to and I quote > one of the members "telling a parent that you wont > regulate him/her but his/her kids will be totally under 3rd > party control". > >> > >> walu. > >> > >> > >> > >> --- On Fri, 5/8/09, Alex Gakuru > <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> > >>> Subject: Re: [ke-internetusers] Breaking News: > Kenyan Internet Community comes face to face with new > Legislation > >>> To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > >>> Cc: ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > >>> Date: Friday, May 8, 2009, 10:55 PM > >>> Walu, > >>> > >>> Thank you for the info although I find it > bordering on > >>> alarmist;) > >>> > >>> I deliberately boycotted today's Kenic AGM > because, > >>> among others, > >>> kenic folks decided they will not post to this > list minutes > >>> of last > >>> year's AGM resolutions, such as, > constitutional change > >>> made to allow > >>> an a certain individual's term of office > to be extended > >>> beyond what > >>> the constitution allowed. There are a couple > of complaints > >>> I > >>> restrained myself from posting onlist. > >>> > >>> Background: > >>> > >>> During last year's AGM the said > "Internet > >>> Community" for the second > >>> (or third?) year running repeatedly complained > about > >>> kenic's failure > >>> to lower .ke domain prices as frustrating .ke > domains > >>> growth. > >>> Registrars we later hurriedly called to a > meeting at the > >>> Grand Hotel > >>> and we were asked to volunteer ourselves to a > committee > >>> that would > >>> look into domain price issue. To the best of > my knowledge > >>> information > >>> and belief no such meeting has ever been > called, to-date. > >>> > >>> At today's 10,133 domain numbers > statistics ( CO.KE 9, > >>> 465 NE.KE 14, > >>> OR.KE 654) > >>> > see:<http://www.kenic.or.ke/statistics.html> kenic > >>> annual > >>> domains selling income exceeds kenya shillings > 20 million > >>> every year - > >>> while Internet consumers continue screaming > "lower > >>> domain prices!" to > >>> seemingly deaf ears and half-hearted Kenyan > domain space > >>> (.ke) > >>> administrator. > >>> > >>> They fail to see the bigger picture. By > lowering domain > >>> prices they > >>> would have very many more being able to afford > local > >>> domain. > >>> > >>> Lets face it, shillings 20 million is not > kidogo money > >>> without > >>> necessarily dwelling on the fact that many of > their staff > >>> are interns > >>> ( Aren't permanent staff only 4?) I > suppose Board > >>> members do not draw > >>> salaries? Again, really whom does the Kenic > Board answer > >>> to/ i.e.holds > >>> them accountable? Only to themselves with > ceremonial AGMs? > >>> > >>> The Law: > >>> > >>> Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act, 2008 > states: > >>> > >>> Section 83F: Licence for country code > top-level domain > >>> > >>> "The Commission [CCK] may, upon > application in the > >>> prescribed manner > >>> and subject to such conditions as it may deem > necessary, > >>> grant > >>> licences under this section authorizing a > person to > >>> administer a > >>> sub-domain in the country top-level > domain" > >>> > >>> What's wrong with CCK granting licenses > to, for example > >>> 3 or 4 (legal) > >>> persons to compete in offering the best-priced > domains to > >>> Kenyans > >>> consumers? > >>> > >>> Conclusion: > >>> > >>> Kenic attracted the competition which perhaps > might have > >>> been avoided > >>> if they had listened to the "Internet > Community" > >>> cries over the year. > >>> I note that you refer to kenic as > "partnership." > >>> Licence conditions > >>> could include all others be representative > partnerships and > >>> PPP > >>> 'problem' solved;) What I am trying > to say is that > >>> kenic should not > >>> be viewed as the only PPP model possible.. > ICANN does not > >>> break > >>> national laws and in any case, note how many > registries > >>> exist in the > >>> US itself. Our market has matured and we need > competition > >>> in the > >>> domain space area also, Yes/No? > >>> > >>> My take is kenic's honeymoon ended when > the law opened > >>> domain pricing > >>> competition space that should lower prices- > good for > >>> consumers but bad > >>> for old kenic 'monopoly era' ;) > >>> > >>> In other words, we do not have a crisis so let > us not make > >>> one up. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> > >>> Alex > >>> --- > >>> References > >>> 1. Boosting numbers in .ke domain names > >>> > <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9451&Item…> > >>> > >>> 2. Kenyans to enjoy reduced charges for > acquiring Internet > >>> domains > >>> > <http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8270&Item…> > >>> > >>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:12 PM, John Walubengo > >>> <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > Apologies for cross-posting: > >>> > > >>> > It took a KENIC (KEnya Network > Information Center, > >>> www.kenic.or.ke) Annual General Meeting for > the Kenyan > >>> Internet community to digest the implication > of the a Kenyan > >>> ICT Legislation passed more than five months > ago. The law > >>> which included sections that touched on the > Media, IT, > >>> Telecommunication and Postal Services has > faced stiff > >>> resistance from the Media fraternity while the > Internet > >>> Community kept a low if not a dead profile. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > It was at the KENIC general meeting held > today in > >>> Nairobi that the Internet Community grappled > with the > >>> implication of the IT section on the operation > of the .KE > >>> namespace. The law specifies that all second > level .KE > >>> internet domain names must be licensed by the > country's > >>> converged Regulator, Communication Commission > of Kenya. > >>> The law requires that all Registries - those > who manage > >>> the internet domains - must apply for a > license by the 2nd > >>> of June 2009. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > KENIC, a public-private-partnership has > under the > >>> ICANN Policies been managing the .KE namespace > including the > >>> 2nd level sub-domains such as xyz.CO.KE, > xyz.OR.KE, etc. > >>> From 2nd June 2009, KENIC must seek permission > from the > >>> Regulator to continue managing these > sub-domains. In an > >>> effort to comply with the law, the KENIC Board > requested the > >>> community to support a resolution that a new > legal entity > >>> (Special Purpose Vehicle, SPV) be created in > order to apply > >>> for the license from the Regulator as well as > compete with > >>> other potential entities that are set to fight > in that > >>> space. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > The proposals opened up heated > discussions with some > >>> members wondering if KENIC was ceding its > hard-won rights > >>> & control over the .KE namespace to an > exclusive and > >>> single entity. The current governance > structure for KENIC > >>> provides for a Multistakeholder Partnership > over the whole > >>> .KE namespace and has the Govt, Academia, > Private > >>> Sector/Telcos and Civil Society Board > Representation that is > >>> wholly accountable to Internet Users during > Annual General > >>> Meetings. Effectively, the new law takes > part of this > >>> mandate and places it under one or two of > these Stakeholders > >>> that is the Regulator/Govt. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Members wondered about the criteria that > would be used > >>> by the Regulator to award the management > licenses to various > >>> competitors. Others wondered about the > potential conflict > >>> between the local legislation and the ICANN > policies given > >>> that KENIC has currently been operating under > ICANN policies > >>> but now has to take cognizance of the local > law. For > >>> example, if the Regulator granted a license to > someone else > >>> to manage the "co.ke" subdomain BUT > the local > >>> internet community for one reason or the other > instructed > >>> the KENIC Board NOT to accept and transfer the > delegation > >>> from KENIC how would that be resolved? And yet > other members > >>> wondered to what extend the proposed SPV would > cannibalize > >>> their existing markets and services. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > It has taken five months of silence but > clearly, the > >>> Kenyan Internet community is just beginning to > understand > >>> and feel the heat of some sections in the ICT > law that had > >>> previously been hijacked and labeled > "Media law" > >>> at the expense of IT practitioners. It will > be interesting > >>> to see how this plays out before and after the > 2nd of June > >>> 2009 - the date when all subdomain managers > must be licensed > >>> by the Regulator. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > walu > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ > >>> > ke-internetusers mailing list > >>> > ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > >>> > > http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers > >>> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> kictanet mailing list > >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > >> > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > >> > >> This message was sent to: alice(a)apc.org > >> Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alice%40apc.org > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ke-internetusers mailing list > >> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > >> > http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers > >> > >

3 2