Re: [soac-mapo] Ideology vs. practicality in MAPO/MOPO

[Antony Van Couvering <avc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

And my further point was that this would all end up in court - where it should. 
  Think of this as a way of winnowing out highly contentious 
strings/applications, and transferring them to the courts, where they belong.

On Jul 12, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> Richard and Antony
>  
> You're saying there are no international laws/ treaties on this topic (I 
> think that's a a statement of fact)  and that even when we talk about 
> 'international norms' we're on shaky ground as such norms are not well 
> defined or broadly accepted.
>  
> This is true.
>  
> Given the above  - you're suggesting this issue is best handled by a broad 
> based panel who would effectively vote on objectionable strings.
>  
> Regardless of the procedural merits of Antony’s proposal, I don’t see how 
> Antony moves from a recognition that there are no international standards to 
> a conclusion that an international panel should invent them. If there are no 
> globally applicable norms, much less legal standards, putting together a 
> broad-based panel to vote on these things is empowering them to _make_ 
> international law.
>  
> Illegitimate, unacceptable, and in some countries, unconstitutional.
>