[ALAC] Fwd: Registries Not Happy with Registry Agreement

[Carlton Samuels]

Ah well... if and only if....

.....ICANN would declare the global public interest as its reason to be.
 And if it'd just get over itself and flat out say 'we a regulator!' all
this argumentation over the unilateral right to amend from the RySG would
be just some pissing in  the wind.

The fact is ICANN unilaterally gave registries license to monetize
character strings, known and hitherto unknown.  And then ICANN took a
little shaving from that gift, called a fee.  You see so-called third world
fleshpots condemned for the exact same thing with tones of high
moral dudgeon.   Not to make too fine a point of it, the registry operators
got themselves a gift that keeps on giving; a protected market, all of us
lessees. Quite apart from the unlucky - or plain dumb - few, they're all
the better for it.

Now, here's the catch. Such action most places are usually in the gift of
the state. And the state tends to raise a statist actor, sometimes called a
regulator - and in noisome places, a regular 'bagman' - to protect its
interests. The common method to retain some measure of control is a
license; see the definitive meaning of that term.  And since that license
is the fiat of the state, it usually is handed down, no input from the
licensee other than their name and particulars. Take it. Or, leave it.

If ICANN would just come out and state the obvious, "I am a regulator, suck
on it' all this unpleasantness would've been avoided.

The contract is supposed to reflect ICANN standing athwarts the portal,
like Leonidas guarding that gateway to Thermopylae, as it were, protecting
the global public interests from the marauding - go with the metaphor now!
- 'contracted parties'.  The figment is the claim that the contract is this
bastion of consensus policy making.  That is overstating the facts and
brushing the line beyond which propaganda begins. For the contracted
parties no way in hell see the rest of the community as having a say in all
this.  Quick now, who can recall them crying out for all of us, the fry,
being invited to the party?

To be brutally frank, I see this kvetching of Chuck Gomes and the RySG
crowd purely as a manifestation of impatience with the assault on their
sense of exceptionalism.  Message from me: count your fingers going in. And
count 'em again, coming out.

-Carlton


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================


On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Robin Gross <robin at ipjustice.org>
> Date: 3 May 2013 17:10
> Subject: Registries Not Happy with Registry Agreement
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu
>
>
> Powerful comments from Chuck Gomes & Verisign about the proposed Registry
> Agreement and ICANN's lack of good faith in the negotiation process:
>
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-base-agreement-29apr13/msg00002.html
>
> It would seem things aren't as cheery and ready to close on RA as ICANN
> said.
>
> Best,
> Robin
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>