"stakeholders" was: Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> .... Even if the manager does a good job,
> stakeholders may want to replace it with another organization ...
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^

May I suggest that we forever drop the word "stakeholders".

That word has been used repeatedly to disenfranchise those who are 
affected by ICANN's positions and to create privileged classes who have 
been fortunate enough (or powerful enough) to have been anointed with the 
attribute "stakeholder".

If truth be told, *everyone* on the planet is affected by the internet, 
everyone has a stake in the internet.  Everyone is a "stakeholder" in the 
internet as a whole.  The citizens and residents of a country are 
"stakeholders" in the country code TLD of that country.

I reject the argument, an argument that is used to justify ICANN's
structure, that certain among us are more equal than others.

There is no need to accord "intellectual property" interests, 
"businesses", or "corporations" any special privileges by granting to them 
the status of "stakeholder".

Intellectual property creators are all of us with minds who record our 
thoughts.

Business is composed not only of sellers but also of buyers - of which we, 
the people of the internet community act in both roles.

Corporations are owned by people and act through people.

The most fundamental error in all of ICANN-dom is this concept of
"stakeholder".

That fact that many among us blithly accept that word, and the
disadvantaged status it confers on many, and the privileged status it
confers on a few, is very, very sad.

		--karl--