RE: [soac-mapo] Third "draft recommendation" (individual government objections)

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

> I guess in that sense all objections (not just Recommendation 6 ones)
> are 'requests to veto' from the Objecting party  (although in the
> Objection process a possible outcome is some form of agreement
> between the two parties).

OK, then you have conceded my point and proven to both Chuck and Bertrand that 
my concerns were not based on a misunderstanding of what was proposed.

If you encourage governments to register "requests to veto" based on _their 
own_ national law, you are telling them that they can, possibly, give their own 
local laws global effects using ICANN as their instrument. That's wrong. It 
doesn't matter whether the bar is high or low, it's completely contrary to any 
notion of bounded, legitimate rule by governments who are accountable to and 
representative of their own people. Neither the government nor the people of 
country A have the right to dictate what the people of country B cannot do. No 
regulation without representation. Further, this leads to a rash of 
contradictory claims - as I have had to say again and again, in many cases it 
will be illegal in one jurisdiction not to suppress something and illegal to 
suppress it in another.

We have, I think, now revealed as false the claim that "individual government 
objections" are just a way to give governments (those poor, helpless, 
unrepresented things) a "hearing". This is not about "hearing," it's about 
"doing."

--MM