[NA-Discuss] FTC letter on new gTLDs

[Eduardo Diaz]

As far as I know, US owns IANA therefore they own the Internet. So even
though they may not have any authority over the ICANN multistakeholder
process in the end it boils down to who owns it. Don't you think?

-ed

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Why is that a US FTC Commission must be listened to?
> Responded to, yes, but listened to, as in obey?  Why?
>
> What authority does they have over the ICANN multistakeholder process?
>
> avri
>
>
> On 19 Dec 2011, at 12:19, Beau Brendler wrote:
>
> > Just wanted to make sure everyone saw, and read, this letter on the new
> gTLD program sent by the FTC to ICANN on the 16th. It's a stinging letter
> and contains a number of elements that several of us have been saying for
> years. It also infers that ICANN is corrupted by contracted parties. For me
> -- I know you don't all share my views -- I feel somewhat vindicated that
> some entity that actually will have to be listened to, is finally saying
> these things:
> >
> > http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/publicltrs/111216letter-to-icann.pdf
> >
> >
> >
> > ------
> > NA-Discuss mailing list
> > NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> >
> > Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> > ------
> >
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>



-- 
NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only
for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
you have received this communication by error, please notify us immediately
by e-mail, and delete the original message.