[At-Large] Replacement for the JPA ?

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

"Elisabeth Porteneuve" <elisabeth.porteneuve at cetp.ipsl.fr> wrote:

> The Affirmation of Commitment by DOC and ICANN has been published on 
> ICANN's website on time, the Internet is twitting, newspapers giving first 
> comments.

IMHO there are no surprises in the announcement. It looks like a pretty much 
middle of the road "keep on doing what you're doing because you're on the 
right path" kind of commitment.
It reinforces the significance of the GAC, which I think is a good thing if 
ICANN wishes to enhance its legitimacy with governments worldwide and make 
them understand that a multi-stakeholder model is better for everyone.

Points which are likely to make some cringe are the commitment that:

"5. ...Nothing in this document is an expression of support by DOC of any 
specific plan or proposal for the implementation of new generic top level 
domain names (gTLDs) or is an expression by DOC of a view that the potential 
consumer benefits of new gTLDs outweigh the potential costs."

With a context of clear support for ccTLDs and IDNs in the paragraph, take 
this sentence any way you wish...

"8. (b) remain a not for profit corporation, headquartered in the United 
States of America with offices around the world to meet the needs of a 
global community;"

But then no official proposals had been suggested for an alternative, so 
what did we expect?

...and a mention in the concluding paragraph:

"11. The DOC enters into this Affirmation of Commitments pursuant to its 
authority under 15 U.S.C. 1512 and 47 U.S.C. 902. ICANN commits to this 
Affirmation according to its Articles of Incorporation and its Bylaws. This 
agreement will become effective October 1, 2009. The agreement is intended 
to be long-standing, but may be amended at any time by mutual consent of the 
parties. Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by 
providing 120 days written notice to the other party. This Affirmation 
contemplates no transfer of funds between the parties. In the event this 
Affirmation of Commitments is terminated, each party shall be solely 
responsible for the payment of any expenses it has incurred. All obligations 
of the DOC under this Affirmation of Commitments are subject to the 
availability of funds."

Which IMHO has been mis-written because it takes standard contract terms re: 
payments incurred.
Elsewhere, this paragraph contains a sentence providing hope that ICANN will 
further be able to internationalise in the future:
"The agreement is intended to be long-standing, but may be amended at any 
time by mutual consent of the parties"

But a sticky point:
"Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by providing 120 
days written notice to the other party."

Which opens the question to the US Dept. of Commerce being able to pull the 
plug at 4 months notice. And then what happens? There doesn't seem to be a 
fallback state if this happens... I must be missing something...

Kind regards,

Olivier

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html