ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board Resolution 2010.11.05.20

  • To: Ron Andruff <randruff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Board Resolution 2010.11.05.20
  • From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:22:54 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> about ICANN's adhesion contract.  JJ and team have developed an AGB that
> solely serves the interests of ICANN by off-loading any and all
> liability and responsibility to applicants alone.

A rare event: I agree heartily with Mr Andruff.

I'd also like to point out to Roberto that while his comments are sensible 
enough in their own right (if a market regulator is needed and there is no 
consensus among the interest groups involved, some decision has to be made by 
the board by default) - we also need to acknowledge the fact that this is not 
the model ICANN was supposed to be based on. And Palage's quotation of Dyson in 
1999 just clinches that argument in a beautiful way. (It's not the only 
quotation from Dyson that looks pretty foolish in retrospect, but that's off 
topic for sure). 

Now, as liability is dumped on registry applicants due to ICANN's corporate 
"risk mitigation" strategy, and staff wants to outsource the MAPO censorship of 
domain names for similar reasons, we begin to get a better idea of what kind of 
a beast was created in 1998 and what it means for the internet. A private corp 
with no membership, no government oversight, no global democratic legislature 
making laws to guide it, making regulatory decisions based in no small part on 
its own organizational self-interest. If you haven't read this yet, you might 
want to take a look: 


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy