On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:44 AM,
Walubengo J
<jwalu@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Alice, McTim et
al.
Plse bring us upto speed on the what is the beef
here. |
The beef here is about who gets the final say about what goes
in the rootzone. That responsibility lies with ICANN and its
constituent Supporting Organisations, but ultimately with the
Board of Trustees of ICANN. Many in the GAC think they should
have veto power of the BoT, and some think they already do
have this power.
My recollection
is that the .xxx top level domain (for Pornographic
content) was previously vetoed by the Bush (Jnr)
government(?) |
not the case. An earlier ICANN Board approved .xxx. Later,
the GAC asked for a delay and ultimately sought to overturn
this earlier Board decision (lots of pressure by the Bushies
here, yes) and the issue went to binding arbitration. ICANN
was told by the arbitration that they had to allow .xxx, and
so they did, eventually despite the GAC not being able to
articulate what they wanted in a timely manner.
but somewhat the Obama administration seems to have
favored it |
also not correct, the DoC of the Obama admin has made lots of
noises against .xxx.
and by
extension ICANN - has finally and procedurally filled
the intention to implement it (?).
|
.xxx is in the rootzone and hence live on the internet.
So what's with the EU request to delay the
implementation? |
Well it is too late for that. Politics I guess??
Is it that the
EU is now backtracking on the .xxx domain? |
I think they have had reservations about it all along, so no,
not backtracking. Just trying to assert authority they don't
have, and that they KNOW the US won't exercise (and they have
said in the past that they don't want the US to exercise it).
And I wonder
what is the general "African" position (if there ever
was one) on this whole issue?
|
I imagine most GAC folks from Africa would be against it.
IIRC, there are several on this list, perhaps they can speak
up?
--