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

[McTim]

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:26 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
wrote:

>
>
>
> What amazes me in all the responses I am getting is that no one is either
> saying that the problem I have posed does not exist or it is not important
> to resolve, nor providing any alternative ways to resolve it.
>






> They are just arguing with parts of my proposal, which is fine, although I
> think, while no doubt this is a somewhat complex solution to a complex
> problem, no one has been able to show why it really cant work.
>
> To remind; the problem I had posed was about the very likely wrongful US's
> jurisdictional imposition on ICANN's process and vis a vis the root server
> maintainer. I had given a concrete example; of a US court pushing the
> well-known over-zealous US intellectual property law and enforcement to
> take away the gTLD of an Indian generic drug manufacturer even when the
> latter has no direct business interests or activities in the US... What is
> your response to such a very likely occurrence?
>

It is highly unlikely, the likelihood approaching zero IMHO.




> Should we simply ignore it?
>

yes, it is safe to do so.  However, you must realise that after the IANA
transition is finished, there will be absolutely zero appetite inside ICANN
to make major reforms.  I doubt you could get that Community to even
consider such a proposal.




> Or, do you not think it likely, in which case lets discuss that
>


If we must.  Let's say that your scenario comes to pass.  You do realise
that ICANN would use the hundreds of millions of dollars in its legal kitty
to fight such a court order, right?





> .... You cannot simply not respond to this key global governance problem
> that stares us in the face... (Apart from it, is the less likely but still
> to be remained prepared for possibility of the The Office of Foreign Assets
> Control of the US playing hanky panky with the gTLD of a country
>


countries don't have gTLDs.



> that the US gets into serious enmity with.... every country likes to
> remain prepared for such an eventuality. You cannot deny them that right.
> )...
>
> No one seems to want to address these key global governance problems. Do
> they not exist? If they do, then what is your response to and preparedness
> for these?
>


They are not key.  They exist as a problem largely in your head.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20160329/ebbcd542/attachment.html>