August 10, 2012

The United Nations and the Internet: It’s Complicated – By Rebecca MacKinnon

See on Scoop.itInformation Society

“An open letter signed by a broad coalition of civil society groups from all over the world has demanded that the December meeting in Dubai be opened to civil society participation, development of a formal public consultation process, and the public release of all policy documents.”

See on www.foreignpolicy.com

August 10, 2012

Why is the UN Trying to Take over the Internet? – Forbes

See on Scoop.itInformation Society

“The “sending-party-network-pays” proposal, in the end, is an archetypal example of what FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell recently called the “please regulate my rival” approach to policy change.”

See on www.forbes.com

August 2, 2012

IGF 2012 Online Registration has started

 The Seventh Annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Meeting will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan from 6-9 November 2012. The proposed main theme for the meeting is:

Internet Governance for Sustainable Human, Economic and Social Development’.

Online registration for the IGF 2012 meeting is now open. It will close on October 15 and the onsite registration will open on Friday 2nd November at the Baku Expo Centre.

To register for the Internet Governance Forum 2012 in Baku, Azerbaijan, please use the Online Registration Form at: https://comanche.vervehosting.com/~wgig/igf/registrationb/threeb.php

via Baku registration form.

Also see the IGF Website for the preparatory process: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/114-preparatory-process/927-igf-2012

And check out the host country Website: http://igf2012.com/

 

July 31, 2012

Carriage vs. Content by Geoff Huston – ISP Column – July 2012

The ISP Column – July 2012.

Carriage vs Content 

by Geoff Huston

Does anyone remember the Internet before Google? And no, using Google to ask about the pre-Google Internet is not going to work all that well! For those of you who can recall the Internet of around 2000, do you also recall what debates were raging at the time? Let me give you a hand in answering that question. One big debate at the time was all about the relationship between the carriage service operators and the content providers, and, as usual, it was all about money. The debate was about who owed who money, and how much. Ten years later and it seems that nothing much has changed.

It’s International Telecommunications Regulations (ITR) season once more, and all these traditional and well rehearsed debates about who owes who money seem to have resurfaced. After all, if I can get a government-blessed regulation to support my claim that you owe me money, then my financial prospects are looking a whole lot better! On this topic, this is the latest pronouncement from the European Telecommunications Network Operators (ETNO), an organization that represents a number of European network operators:

6 July 2012

[…]

“The Executive Board of ETNO reiterates its call for a new sustainable economic model for the Internet, insisting that it should be based on commercial agreements between all players of the value chain. The ITRs must reflect market changes and encourage future growth and sustainable development of telecoms markets, without changing any of the guiding principles that have contributed to the success of the Internet so far”, says Luigi Gambardella, ETNO Executive Board Chair.

What is this “new sustainable economic model for the Internet”? What sustainable model is so unsustainable that it is only achievable through a path of regulatory intervention and the imposition of ongoing regulatory measures within the supply chains of carriage and content services for the Internet?

I guess that the reference to “all players of the value chain” is a bit of a give away here. What this appears to be alluding to is a case being constructed by a number of large scale carriage operators in Europe that the content providers should pay these carriage operators to allow content reach their customers. In other words this ETNO position is arguing that content should now pay a carriage toll.

Looking Back: “You owe us money!”

In looking at this I am reminded of the pretty much a mirror image of the same debate that occurred some ten years ago. Lets look back to 2001 and see what we were discussing then. I’d like to reproduce a part of an article that I wrote on this topic at the time:

Around ten years ago the Internet content industry was having a hard time. Providing content on the internet was a task of devotion and faith, as the activity was generally without remuneration. Almost everything the content folk had tried in terms of sustaining an Internet-based content economy was failing. Nobody was buying subscription services. Banner ads were widely viewed as an annoyance. The all-important click rate on banner ads was just too low to sustain a rich content industry. Portals and attempts to corral the user, such as the much touted Look Smart of the Internet boom of the preceding years, were now looking distinctly passé and certainly not a revenue opportunity. And efforts to use search engines as advertising platforms got nowhere once it was revealed that some search engine’s ranking result order was essentially for sale. Nothing seemed to be working as a viable content model.

So content looked for where the money was at the time, and lo and behold they saw the access service providers, who were billing every customer every month. We heard the strident call from the content providers: “Access is only useful if there is content. Access is essentially reselling our content, but not paying for it. This is theft! You owe us money!”

Of course they were not quite as rude as me! The rhetoric we were hearing at the time from the content providers sounded more like: The structure of the Internet market must reflect market changes and encourage future growth and sustainable development of the Internet, without changing any of the guiding principles that have contributed to the success of the Internet so far.

Yes, that should sound familiar. It’s the same argument we are now hearing from the carriage operator, now arguing that there should be a monetary flow in the opposite direction!

The Different Paths of Content and Carriage

Aside from the obvious amusement value, what is there to learn from this volte-face that the industry has managed to achieve in the past decade? What happened?

I suppose that the major shift was a dramatic change in the advertising model, and the best example I can think of to illustrate this comes from Hal Varian, a noted economist in the information space who observed back in 1998 or thereabouts that spam is merely a failure of information about the consumer. If you knew all there was to know about that consumer then you could ensure that what you sent to the consumer was not unwanted digital detritus but timely and helpful advice!

What content providers started doing a decade ago was intensively scrutinising their users. What web pages did they linger on? What content attracted their interest? What makes a user come back to a content site? What is the user wanting to purchase? Can we help in facilitating this purchase? What could we do for the user that would provide even more knowledge about the user’s preferences? Would running their mail service provide that depth of information? How about running their document storage system? How about helping them create their documents? All of these online services might be free to the user, but at the same time they are immensely valuable services. They provide a rich vein of real time information about each and every user. And its this stream of information that can be sold to advertisers as intimate knowledge of a consumer’s preferences and interests.

This form of mining of the data exhaust that each user generates in this online environment has proved to be transformational for the content industry. And until now it has not been a battle between the carriage operators and the content providers over the money. It’s been a battle within the content industry itself, where the Internet has been pitted against the traditional content behemoths, the newsprint industry. At stake has been what was described by Fairfax, a newspaper publisher in Australia, as the “rivers of gold.” At stake is the newspapers’ advertising revenue. And the Internet has won this struggle. The factors of declining readerships, falling advertising revenues, the shrinking pool of journalists, are all visible across most of the print newspaper world. At the same time the stock prices of the hypergiants in the Internet’s content factory, such as Google, continue to show an optimistic outlook.

Obviously the content providers quickly forgot all about their earlier contretemps with the carriage operators, and quickly walked away from their previous strident demands for payment as they turned their attention to a far larger potential revenue stream. The rise in the value of the online market not only stimulated ever greater shifts to online advertising, but also reinvigorated various other forms of sponsorship of content, and even has lead to a revival of the content subscription model. Content was now not only a viable industry, but one that appeared to be growing at such a pace that it was looking as though it would soon dwarf the carriage sector in economic terms.

While the content world had managed to stumble upon a business model that has just worked for them, the carriage world is now working with a business model that is creaking and groaning with age. In 1999 modems were still very common as the last mile access method. A modem, even running at full speed, doesn’t carry much traffic. The difference in load between the most intense users and the average user load profile is slight. The “flat fee” retail tariff that did not take into account the traffic volumes was one that was extremely simple and had minimal risk exposure in terms of variations in the load profile of individual users. These days it’s all DSL and cable and the prospect of fibre. The variation of data volumes is higher and a uniform flat fee exposes a greater degree of risk for the carrier. The top 5% of the most intense users are probably using upwards of 50% or even 75% of the carriage operator’s total capacity when looking at aggregate volumes. But, like the road system, its not aggregate volumes that count – it’s the ability to clear the traffic during peak hours, and at these times the baseline average peak use is a critical metric. As long as this peak use profile does not shift dramatically the flat fee access model is sustainable at the current price point. But of course everything changes, and with the advent of content services such as Netflix, Hulu, and the massive uptake of YouTube, today’s “average” user during peak hours is looking a lot like yesterday’s “heavy hitter” but they are still paying the carriage operator yesterday’s flat access fee. The carriage operator is now claiming that they have to beef up their capacity, and spend additional money in augmenting carriage infrastructure capacity. But where are the funds to support this work? Where is the business case?

Today: “No, its you who owe us money!”

The carriage operators are now trying to make the case that their activity is unsustainable, much the same way as the content providers tried to make the same case a decade ago. The carriage operators have been heard to argue that raising retail tariffs for the Internet would be “discriminatory” for their users. Discriminatory or not, the underlying observation is that having established a price point in the consumer market its hard for any single provider to lift their prices without dramatically losing market share, and if all the carriage operators acted in unison the consumer protection agencies and market regulators would tie them up in protracted and expensive proceeding over cartel-like behaviour and abuse of market power. If it’s not the user who will pay then the choices are pretty limited.

It’s no surprise that the carriage operators’ attention has quickly fixated on where they believe the money is. They have turned their attention to the content industry and eyeing them off as their financial salvation, and they are now attempting to enlist government-blessed regulation to assist them in their efforts of financial extortion of the content industry.

But creating structural distortions in the carriage business by imposing a levy on content and passing the proceeds to the carriage providers would be as unwise now as performing the opposite structural cross-subsidy would’ve been ten years ago.

It’s not that the carriage role is unsustainable. It’s not that imposing a levy on content to subsidise the carriage industry is essential for any future of the carriage operator. Not at all. It’s that yesterday’s business models aren’t necessarily appropriate for today, let alone tomorrow. There are carriage operators carrying a large portfolio of legacy carriage products, high debt levels with high interest premiums, aging plant and a collection of challenging managerial and shareholder expectations about return on investment that all take their toll on the efficiency of their business model. There is still a continual theme that the glories of the past in terms of the telco monopolies of decades ago can somehow be reconstructed within the landscape of the Internet.

But this is not a universal picture and while many carriage operators, particularly those with a past in the telco sector, are still carrying with them these inefficient burdens of legacy, there are other more recent entrants in this market who see a sustainable role in viewing IP carriage as a commodity utility operation. With more modest expectations about revenues and margins these more recent enterprises are not just surviving, but evidently thriving in today’s carriage market. It is evidently possible to operate a carriage service efficiently, and it is evidently possible to meet the demands for delivered capacity in the Internet, but undertaking this role demands the rigours of being a simple utility operator, rather than fostering the lingering pretence of being a “full service telecommunications service provider.”

And maybe that’s a good thing. Deregulation of this industry did not mean that we unleashed a new set of lumbering behemoths to fight it out in the dinosaur swamps with the incumbent set of behemoths. Exposing this industry to the rigours of competition exposed it to competition from specialist enterprises, who competed for market share within a narrow area of specialist activity. The old behemoth relied on monopoly power over a market in order to sustain structural cross-subsidy of the various component activities. Deregulation and competition has pulled those cosy arrangements apart. The outcomes are all working to the benefit the end user, who is the beneficiary of an immensely rich world of content, information, and personal empowerment, at a price which is still well below what used to be the monthly cost of the rental of those clunky old handsets.

And how should we respond to ETNO’s demands for regulatory intervention to impose a “new sustainable economic model for the Internet”?

Our response now should be exactly the same as it was 10 years ago – no!

Disclaimer

The views expressed are the author’s and not those of APNIC, unless APNIC is specifically identified as the author of the communication. APNIC will not be legally responsible in contract, tort or otherwise for any statement made in this publication.

About the Author

GEOFF HUSTON B.Sc., M.Sc., has been closely involved with the development of the Internet for many years, particularly within Australia, where he was responsible for the initial build of the Internet within the Australian academic and research sector. He is author of a number of Internet-related books, and has been active in the Internet Engineering Task Force for many years.

www.potaroo.net

July 19, 2012

History of the Internet in a Nutshell

 

Check out the interactive Infographic History of the Internet in a Nutshell on mashable.com

These have been 21 very exciting years for me since I started using the Internet in late 1990!

How many of the developments pictured in the above Infographic do you remember?

July 7, 2012

UN Human Rights Council – The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet

The following is the text of the landmark decision by the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, adopted without a vote on 5 July 2012. The press release of 6 July 2012 summarizes the resolution as follows:

“In a resolution on the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet the Council affirmed that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression.”

United Nations – Document A/HRC/20/L.13

General Assembly

Distr.: Limited

29 June 2012

Original: English

Human Rights Council

Twentieth session
Agenda item 3

Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development

Algeria*, Argentina*, Australia*, Austria, Azerbaijan*, Belgium, Bolivia (Plurinational
State of)*, Bosnia and Herzegovina*, Brazil*, Bulgaria*, Canada*, Chile, Costa Rica,
Côte d’Ivoire*, Croatia*, Cyprus*, Czech Republic, Denmark*, Djibouti, Egypt*,
Estonia*, Finland*, France*, Georgia*, Germany*, Greece*, Guatemala, Honduras*,
Hungary, Iceland*, India, Indonesia, Ireland*, Italy, Latvia*, Libya, Liechtenstein*,
Lithuania*, Luxembourg*, Maldives, Malta*, Mauritania, Mexico, Monaco*,
Montenegro*, Morocco*, Netherlands*, Nigeria, Norway, Palestine*, Peru, Poland,
Portugal*, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Republic of Korea*, Romania, Serbia*,
Slovakia*, Slovenia*, Somalia*, Spain, Sweden*, the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia*, Timor-Leste*, Tunisia*, Turkey*, Ukraine*, United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland*, United States of America, Uruguay: draft resolution
(* Non-Member State of the Human Rights Council)

20/…The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet

The Human Rights Council,

Guided by the Charter of the United Nations,

Reaffirming the human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and relevant international human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,

Recalling all relevant resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights and the
Human Rights Council on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, in particular Council resolution 12/16 of 2 October 2009, and also recalling General Assembly resolution 66/184 of 22 December 2011,

Noting that the exercise of human rights, in particular the right to freedom of
expression, on the Internet is an issue of increasing interest and importance as the rapid pace of technological development enables individuals all over the world to use new information and communications technologies,

Taking note of the reports of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, submitted to the Human Rights Council at its seventeenth session,¹ and to the General Assembly at its sixty-sixth session,² on freedom of expression on the Internet,

  1. Affirms that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice, in accordance with articles 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
  2. Recognizes the global and open nature of the Internet as a driving force in accelerating progress towards development in its various forms;
  3. Calls upon all States to promote and facilitate access to the Internet and international cooperation aimed at the development of media and information and communications facilities in all countries;
  4. Encourages special procedures to take these issues into account within their existing mandates, as applicable;
  5. Decides to continue its consideration of the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights, including the right to freedom of expression, on the Internet and in other technologies, as well as of how the Internet can be an important tool for development and for exercising human rights, in accordance with its programme of work.
____________

¹ A/HRC/17/27

² A/66/290

Source: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session20/A.HRC.20.L.13_en.doc

UN Human Rights – Internet (Word Doc)

 

June 25, 2012

ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé opening speech at ICANN Prague – 25 June 2012

Below is a video and the text of the opening speech of the new ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade at ICANN Prague:

Watch the video: ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé opening speech at ICANN Prague – 25 June 2012

Transcript:

Thank you, Steve. And I add my thanks also to Minister Kuba and to Ondrej Filip for the great welcome for our hosts here. Thank you. And special thanks to Rod who has graciously welcomed me into this community. Thank you, Rod.

I think many of you want to know who am I. I have met as many of you as I could over the last two days, shook many hands, but many people don’t know me. I’m new to the ICANN community. So let me start by sharing some things about me.

Of course, I have watched with a smile the newspaper reports over the last two days since my announcement. The Lebanese claim a Lebanese is now leading ICANN, an Egyptian is heading ICANN, a U.S., an American is heading ICANN. So I’m watching all of this and you might be saying: who is this guy? And really being American or being Egyptian or being Lebanese, this is just my identity card. What you want to know is what is my identity, not my identity card.

And as the Greek author Ami Maloof wrote: your identity is really what you have done. It is a collection of all the things you have done in your journey. So if you want to know my identity for those of you from different parts of the world saying: is this another American running this? Is this the Arab spring coming to lead ICANN? What is going on here? I think you just read where I’ve been, and that will tell you who I am.

my identity is within me, and I will bring everything I’ve done to the service of ICANNSo my identity is within me, and I will bring everything I’ve done to the service of ICANN. That’s the most important part. But in practice, I was — I’m born of Egyptian parents who moved around the world. They lived in [city name] and Sudan a little bit and then in Cairo and then moved to Beirut and that’s where I was born. Grew up in Beirut, in a very French part of Beirut. So even as a child, the little nuns made sure that I spoke French til noon and if I spoke Arabic in the morning, I was going to be sent to the room and put some milk in my ears and the mice will come. So we only spoke French til noon.

And then in the afternoon, I became completely Arabic. I couldn’t speak French. So even then my identity was already being formed, and I would go home and I have Egyptian parents who were from a minority of Coptic Christians in Egypt who left Egypt in the 1940s. This experience of growing up in a war-torn country where I had to learn obviously to lose everything, to lose friends, to lose what I grew up with and being whisked out of Beirut during a very difficult time. My dad found out that some of my friends were telling me how to use guns at the age of 13, so supposedly I could defend our little city. And so he put me on a little lorry and shipped me to Damascus and said ‘don’t come back’. And I actually did it. I came in and out back to Beirut but the war was still going on until, as you know, quite late.

And then I frankly want to tell you this because many people look at this experience and say ‘how horrible’. I look at it and say how lucky, how lucky to have had this experience to learn what is important at this age and to grow up and go to the United States and embrace a brand-new culture.

I arrived to the US, I did not speak English. I was 18, and my first job was to peel onions. I did that for seven months. It was remarkable. Tried to do that for three days. [laughter] It’s painful.

But it taught me many things, and I did go to school to learn English at the time and grew from that experience to learn of the generosity of the world. An alone young man in a place of linguistic limitations, grow up and so many people supporting me, so many people helping me. I was talking yesterday to someone here who used to be at Bell Labs, a place I stopped by along the way, and I shared with her how AT&T covered all my expenses to go to Stanford university and paid my salary while I was there and didn’t ask me to come back and work for them.

This is the generosity that I will bring and I have brought to every endeavorThey said, you know, ‘just go do the right thing and when you finish and you gain this knowledge, use it well’. This is remarkable. This is the generosity that I will bring and I have brought to every endeavor that I took.

And I think this community has been nothing but generous to the world. What you give the world and the Internet is an amazing gift. I mentioned in the press conference that the Internet has been at the basis of every success I made in business, and I have never had anyone show up at my door and say ‘oh, we enabled your last business, we need a percentage of what you did. We enabled this next business you are about to build.’ No one asked me for anything.

This great gift of watching today in Cairo, my fellow Egyptians celebrate a new president, enabled by the great power of the InternetMy mother who’s 87 and living with me had never used a typewriter all her life. We got her a iPad. And she now is connected to all the people that she has left from [city name] all the way to Los Angeles over 50 years. All enabled by the Internet. This great gift of watching today in Cairo, my fellow Egyptians celebrate a new president, enabled by the great power of the Internet that was available to them to tell the world what they’re feeling. These are all gifts. They’re gifts and we cannot frankly overblow this, but it is critical and it is important and it must remain the way it is, a gift to all people. It is the greatest public gift.

And, lastly, I want to mention something. Along my little journey I had the privilege in 1998 to start RosettaNet. For those of you who are not familiar with RosettaNet, RosettaNet was a multi-stakeholder standards body. I didn’t know the world “multi-stakeholder” then, but that’s what it is. And I brought together the whole IT sector. And if any of you here have tried to get Oracle, SAP, Microsoft and IBM and HP to sit around in a room and agree on what kind of coffee, you know you would get 28 ICT companies in the world to agree on standards who define how their business processes work was not easy. In, in fact, everyone that I told ‘I’m going to do this’ told me that I should check my head, that this would not be possible.

Within 40 days, the 28 leading companies of the ICT sector worldwide, not just in the US, were sitting around a table and building RosettaNet. And just as a small note here, ‘rosetta’ is the stone that was found in Egypt a couple hundred years ago by Napoleon’s armies. For those of may have visited the British Museum in London and have seen it, you know that the Rosetta Stone has three languages on it and this is very important. It is not about creating a single language, we all know what happened to Esperanto. It is about a stone that enables understanding between languages. In the way this is the message.

It is about how we come together to listen to each other and build things togetherNeither ICANN nor RosettaNet could have imposed any one way to do things or one country’s view of things. It is about an understanding. It is about how we come together to listen to each other and build things together. This is the symbol of the Rosetta Stone. Now, with this I think I should get back to my note, otherwise we’ll know too much about me. And I want to tell you a little bit more about my values and what drives me.

I mentioned this in the press conference, and I’m going to repeat this. I am driven by building consensus. It is the reason I am here today. There is no other reason. I love doing this. Bringing communities that on the face of it could never be brought together to agree on common things is exactly what I strive to do. I do it not just here, I do it in my community, in my church and also in my home, in my family. This is what drives me.

And I think this is foundational for the multi-stakeholder environment. If we do not start with this, we will only deliver the words. We will not do it. And I am all about inclusion, and inclusion starts by stepping out of the organization and looking at it from the outside, not being inside and seeing everything our way. So the first thing we need to do, and I will do, is I will step outside and look from the outside in and listen and include everyone that needs to be brought into ICANN from the beginning, from day one. This will be in my DNA in how I will work.

Now, those of you who appreciate the multi-stakeholder model would say this is much harder. It is a lot easier, there are other easier ways to do things. Yes, this is not easy. This is going to require patience and hard work. But, frankly, it yields a much richer value to everybody when we do it. So it is harder, but we will do it.

I will manage the staff with a very strong decision-making model from the beginningI come — besides RosettaNet and all my personal endeavors in the non-profit world, I come from a business mind-set which says that decisions must be made clearly, deliberately and in a strong approach. I will do this with a team. I’m not known to make decisions on my own. In fact, I’ve been reproached about that. I like to involve the whole community to listen and a strong team to help me arrive to the right conclusions. And then I will present these to the community and I will manage the staff with a very strong decision-making model from the beginning. And we need that today. We have a lot of work ahead.

I care much more about getting things done than about figuring out who should get the credit. We will focus on getting things done, and this is what we need to do today. And, finally, I want to tell you that mutual understanding is an area that I will invest a lot of time in. I saw yesterday the GAC meeting and how the dialogue can actually get us all much closer to understanding what is worrying us. I shared with some of the members of the GAC after the meeting my understanding, my listening as to what’s happening in that room and what are their worries. And I will do the same with the GNSO and all the other SO and AC groups. Mutual listening and understanding is fundamental to my values.

I’m new to all of this, and today you will not get many exact, specific road-map items from me. By Toronto I will be ready, and I will spend the next three months getting ready. But I will tell you, there are two things that I must bring up today that are very important from what I’ve seen.

Being international is from inside out. It’s understanding from the ground up how other cultures thinkThe first: ICANN is an international organization and we must strive to make it international. And that’s not dressing. That is not an office in another country. That is not that I speak four languages. Being international is from inside out. It’s understanding from the ground up how other cultures think, how other people manage, and how we should all be understanding that not all of us have the same access. I spent time yesterday with the African delegation, with the Latin American delegation. I heard them and I felt their yearning to be reached. And I will spend time doing this. This is important.

And I will ensure that our people see it from the inside out as an international endeavor. It is who I am. Just look at my background. Just look at my confused identity, if you may call it, although I don’t find it confused. I simply find it broad, and I find it to be encompassing rather than limited to an identity card. And we will do the same at ICANN. So we will integrate everything in our daily work to make it international from day one.

Second thing, all the things I could say are meaningless if ICANN does not operate with excellence. It is all meaningless. People, process, systems. Fortunately or unfortunately I was also trained at IBM and at Bell Labs. You put these things together and you do them calmly, steadfastly, with a lot of precision and we will deliver. We cannot be expected to do less than the commercial world. We must be expected to do five times better, ten times better than the commercial world. This is critical to who we are.

So technical excellence, people excellence, contract management excellence. I didn’t learn that frankly until I got to IBM until I found out that the contract management department is larger than the contract-making department. And I said why? And they said because most people don’t manage their contracts. You got to spend time managing. Now, I know all these things are in place today at ICANN. But ICANN is experiencing a major change and major expansion. So it’s very important that I work with my colleague Akram to scale all these things and to make them happen and to ensure that no one in the community is doubting the operational quality and excellence of what is being delivered at ICANN every day. [applause]

Thank you. Look, these are times of great change for the ICANN community. The very fact that I’m here, someone who did not grow up in the ICANN community, that’s change. But I do have the background, the Internet has been every part of what I’ve done, and I have the technical background. I used to teach computer science. So I will bring all my qualities to the fore and I will work with this superb team that I met in the last few days to actually make sure that this change doesn’t bring us to our knees but, rather, it becomes a moment of greatness for us.

ICANN cannot become a fortress. ICANN must become an oasisBut in doing that and in doing it in a steadfast structured way, we cannot become a fortress. ICANN cannot become a fortress. ICANN must become an oasis, a place that people see and come to because it works, because it makes sense, because it’s efficient.

And oasis also because ICANN is part of an ecosystem. We’re not alone. We don’t run the Internet, in case anybody thought we did. We’re a part of an ecosystem of companies, of institutions, of fora that make this whole enterprise work, this sacred enterprise that has brought so much to people. You heard Ondrej speak about what it has done to them.

All of you know what it has done to your lives. So we have to keep ICANN as an oasis, and that I hope is what I’m remembered by when one day I pass the baton hopefully as graciously as Rod to the next person, that we open — we keep ICANN open just as it is today and have it become an attractive place. The multi-stakeholder model is also our responsibility. People need to look at it and copy it. We need to be a model of that.

Finally, I’d like to really thank the members of the Board of Directors for their trust in me, for what they’ve asked me to do here. I will do everything I can to live up to the trust you put in me, every one of you. Thank you.

And for those of you who — because Steve was brief with his remarks about the work they did, the amount of rigor that was put in selecting this candidate in front of you is remarkable, remarkable. The commitment, the passion that the board members put to select me — and I’m very humbled by this, extremely humbled by this, I will approach this role with the same humility every day until we pass the baton to the next leader.

Secondly, I want to thank the staff, those I met and those I look forward to meet for welcoming me. I’m your least — I’m going to be hopefully the one that will help each of you be very successful at what you do. I know how hard our staff works and I will take care of giving you the best environment so that you can grow.

And I want to thank Akram for stepping in while I’m trying to wind down some other things. Akram, as many of you know, is a friend, is a colleague. I have the utmost confidence in his ability to do what needs to be done, not just in the next three months, but hopefully in the years ahead while he and I walk step in step to deliver the ICANN you all want. And, finally, I want to thank my wife who’s here and my family who have brought me to here.

Okay. Way forward, I will make to you three pledges today. Number one, I will listen. I will listen to all of you. We may not always agree, and we shouldn’t. This is what the model is. But I will listen.

I will be very transparent, super transparentNumber two: I will be very transparent, super transparent. Is there a bigger word? Extra transparent. It’s very important that I remain — this is an oasis model. I have to be very transparent.

And, lastly: I will make all my decisions for the public interest, all my decisions for the public interest. These are my pledges. Thank you.