Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
هذا المحتوى متوفر فقط باللغة (أو اللغات)
This statement, made in a personal capacity, welcomes the work of the IFR2.
However, it focuses on the IANA Intellectual Property Registration (IPR) Agreements, which, unlike the IANA Functions Review (IFR) and Public Technical Identifiers (PTI), are not subject to ICANN’s Organisational Review Processes or given the same level of scrutiny. For example, the process for appointing Community Coordination Group (CCG) members, as defined in the IANA IPR Community Agreement, lacks clarity, and there is no formal review of these agreements. The IFR2 should check with ICANN Legal on concerns raised by the author of this statement.
A pertinent question is posed: If the matter is outside the scope of IFR2, who is responsible for creating and reviewing the necessary accountability, transparency, and decision-making processes to ensure that IANA IPR issues are addressed with the same diligence as other IANA/PTI matters?