[At-Large] R: R: Is ICANN's oversight really moving away from the US government?

Tue Apr 26 19:31:17 UTC 2016

On 26/04/2016, 20:19, "Pranesh Prakash" <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:
>In part, yes. Please look at the comments that CIS and other submitted
>to this:
>https://www.icann.org/public-comments/dns-underserved-2014-05-14-en

Which bits specifically?

>
>Some requirements imposed by ICANN have no relevance in a country like 
>India or Egypt.

Then don’t use a gTLD domain name. 

>
>Where must arbitration under registry contracts with ICANN happen?  Los 
>Angeles County. 

Unless you are a registry that has signed a contract with ICANN why does that matter?

> Which is the exclusive venue for contractual litigation 
>against ICANN by registries? . Los Angeles County.
>
>Surely you're not arguing that it is "natural" that U.S. companies 
>continue to dominate in this area and that ICANN policy has nothing to 
>do with it?  Do you think the .com contract will ever be opened up for 
>competitive bidding?
>
>-- 
>Pranesh Prakash
>Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
>http://cis-india.org | tel:+91 80 40926283
>sip:pranesh at ostel.co | xmpp:pranesh at cis-india.org
>https://twitter.com/pranesh
>