[CCWG-ACCT] Legal question
Dr Eberhard W Lisse
el at lisse.NA
Sat Apr 25 14:31:30 UTC 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
sorry for being late, but somehow I left this on the netbook :-)-O
as much as I would want the FoI to become ICANN policy, and binding
ICANN (or rather the IANA Function Manager) in its behavior
regarding each and all ccTLD Managers (whether ccNSO Members or
not), the other way round is not true.
Would you expect me to speak for or act on behalf of .NZ in a
binding way just because the A and Z are close together on the
I understand Member Organization as to be able to do that. And I
can not go along with that.
This does not even address the question whether the USG has any
claim to the root, and the numerous consequences originating from
And I am not sure why you would not have discussed the FoI at length
with Keith Davidson? In particular with regards to a PDP. I have
always been in favor of a PDP, he wasn't, and quite adamantly.
On 2015-04-21 20:35 , Jordan Carter wrote:
> hi all, Eberhard:
> On 22 April 2015 at 07:25, Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el at lisse.na
> <mailto:el at lisse.na>> wrote:
> Roelof, Jordan,
> the ccNSO is a supporting organization of ICANN and deals only with
> very specific issues through a Policy Development Process. Nothing
> more, nothing less. AND, these Policies are only binding on ccNSO
> members, during their membership to ccNSO, ie if someone left, no
> ccNSO policy would concern.
>> Let me ask this then --- if the FOI was to be converted to a
>> global policy dealing with its subject matter, would that not
>> happen through a ccNSO PDP?
>> Whatever the process, that PDP or something else, would it not be
>> the framework that guided ICANN's action for ccTLDs regardless of
>> their membership of the ccNSO?
>> That's what I meant by the word. Not a framework that decided how
>> ccTLDs operate. None of us would welcome that, I don't think!
> It is totally different from a membership organization we are
> discussing here.
>> We are talking about membership (or designator) powers exercised
>> over ICANN to keep ICANN accountable to the Internet community,
>> including to us.
>> Not talking about using a membership concept as a trojan horse to
>> impose obligations on the ICANN community or its
>> cheers Jordan
> I also totally disagree that we are allowed to set a framework for
> ccTLDs. In the ISTACC call we discussed this last week.
> Just for the record, I may have been involved with this even since
> before Chris, and changing landscape doesn't mean anything with
> regards to the rights of a ccTLD Manager. ICANN's powers, if any,
> do not grow on trees.
> greetings, el
> On 2015-04-21 20:05 , Roelof Meijer wrote:
>>> Unless EACH and EVERY ccTLD Manager formally joins such
>>> organization such organization will not have any standing. At
>> I have to disagree. In the situation that the conscious
>> decision of a ccTLD manager NOT to be a member is the sole reason
>> for that manager not being a member
>> From: Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
>> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz
> <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>>> Date: dinsdag 21 april 2015
>> 20:32 Cc: Accountability Cross Community
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>> Subject: Re:
>> [CCWG-ACCT] Legal question
>> Hi all:
>> On 21 April 2015 at 23:25, Dr Eberhard Lisse <el at lisse.na
>> <mailto:el at lisse.na> <mailto:el at lisse.na <mailto:el at lisse.na>>>
>> Dear Co-Chairs,
>> could you please explain to the gentleman from the IPC that it
>> is NOT possible for ccTLD Managers, whether they are members of
>> the ccNSO or not to become a "member organization" (as we are
>> discussing here).
>> Unless EACH and EVERY ccTLD Manager formally joins such
>> organization such organization will not have any standing. At
>> This is clearly not accurate. If this argument had any legs,
>> then the same could be said of the ccNSO.
>> ccTLD managers participate in ICANN through the ccNSO and would
>> do through a community mechanism that involved membership in
>> order to deal with ICANN and global policies, such as they are -
>> not to manage the bilateral relationships Eberbard mentions
>> On Chris's broader point, he has been involved with the ccNSO
>> since before it was formed and I have not. I do not understand
>> the aversion he alleges in respect of memberships. I know things
>> are pretty different in 2015 to what they were in 1998.
>> I think our job is to set up a clear and coherent framework for
>> ccTLDs along with the rest of the community to consider, and our
>> job too is to explain clearly what such a model (including any
>> options) would ACTUALLY as opposed to on a FUD basis, offer to
>> and require of members/designators or classes of
>> members/designators -- including any issues with associations
>> If ccTLD managers chose as a group to not participate in a
>> scheme that was workable, and thereby prevented meaningful
>> accountability reforms in ICANN, then they would be putting the
>> IANA stewardship transition at risk.
>> I don't think they'd to that lightly. But I do think that
>> however unlikely, the fact this could happen ( due to our
>> non-contracted status, in the end we ccs have the choice) does
>> mean that the doctrine of organisational and institutional
>> conservatism is very important.
>> Which is why I am glad to see Chris's questions assigned to the
>> counsel, and why I look forward to their response.
>> cheers Jordan
> [...] _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> -- Jordan Carter
> Chief Executive *InternetNZ*
> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
> jordan at internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz> Skype:
> /A better world through a better Internet /
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community