RE: [soac-mapo] Possible ICANN liability

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

I hope your first sentence answer is correct, but that was not the 
issue I was raising. The scenario is you are running .objectionable 
but when you go belly-up, ICANN takes it over (at least in the 
interim) and ICANN is now the proprietor of .objectionable. And some 
US district attorney decides that ICANN is now responsible for the 
insidious behaviour associated with that tld.
Alan

At 31/08/2010 03:26 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Absolutely no legal basis for this that I can see. And it could be 
> easily addressed through the registry contract. ICANN makes no 
> warrants that any applicant will succeed in their business.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 2:25 PM
> > To: soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Possible ICANN liability
> >
> >
> > I have a question that I don't think has been addressed before.
> >
> > Some of the scenarios that are being discussed would allow possibly
> > "objectionable" names to go into the root, and be blocked by various
> > authorities if they felt it appropriate.
> >
> > In cases such as these, would ICANN have any liability if the
> > registry should ultimately fail and ICANN ends up being the de facto
> > custodian of the TLD until it can be re-delegated or shut down.
> > Specifically, ICANN operates in a jurisdiction the might allow some
> > sort of lawsuit that the original operator, because of where they
> > were situated, would not have been subject to.
> >
> > Alan