Re: [alac] ICANN blows off Ed Hasbrouck

[Bret Fausett <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> What I do not like is that action from ICANN is required in
> order to have an independent review.

Agreed. In the long term, it should be like filing a UDRP Complaint. You 
go straight to the arbitration tribunal.

> For the short term, I would be inclined to recommend the Board to let
> the appeal go to the ICC for IRP,  but I would like to see discussion
> going in ALAC before presenting a position.

Yes, I think Mr. Hasbrouck's complaint ought to be forwarded to the 
arbitration tribunal, just as ICANN promised him it would do in Vancouver.

In the medium term, I also think ICANN should consider what position it 
will take about the scope of Independent Review before it files a 
position statement in the arbitration. The General Counsel's position is 
absurd. While I can understand the superficial appeal of the argument 
that the Board is there to correct Staff mistakes while the Independent 
Review exists to correct Board mistakes, in the real world, the actions 
of "ICANN" are not so easily divisible into "Board" and "Staff" actions.

Such a division also would be easy to plead around. In other words, 
rather than complain that Staff failed to act in an open and transparent 
manner, I would simply complain that the Board failed to require Staff 
to act in an open and transparent manner. At the end of the day, it 
becomes a pleading artifice, not a real distinction.

            Bret