Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Draft summary of public comment (second milestone report) ready for JAS WG review

[ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Michele,

> The DAG refers to ipv6 - it doesn't specify that it has to be native.

The problem with viewing the requirements in the DAG to be made in bad faith,
that is, capable of being satisfied by the weakest possible means, is that if
one assumes that -- that ICANN-as-a-contracting-party -- is making bad faith
demands on its counter-parties, it means (a) that ICANN can't expect that its
compliance will be supported by the courts, which don't reward language that
is unsupported by intent (*), and (b) that the applicant is risking that the
interpretation which does it the least harm will be the interpretation that
applies.

Eric

(*) I Am Not A Lawyer (IANAL) but the question of how California courts treat
contacts where the intent and the language differ came up this week so I just
happen to have asked.