[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:07:33PM +0000, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
> 
> Have you ever heard of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy? The UDRP regulates users more than registrars. 

The distinction I'm trying to maintain and that you keep running over
is the difference between regulating a particular action and
regulating users as such.  The UDRP regulates a specific thing -- a
particular registration under dispute -- and not the person who has
made such a registration.  

> ok because it deals with domain names, but similar things could be
> put into the contracts that, to use a deliberately silly and
> therefore non-distracting example, required people to wear blue
> shirts on Thursdays, on pain of losing their domains.

This obliterates the distinction again.  Presumably, the
blue-shirt-wearing would have to bet tied to one or more specific
domains, not any domain name registration the person happens to hold
(since some of those domain names aren't even subjet to ICANN
regulation.  I'm a registrant in .ca, for instance, and I shouldn't
expect the terms I'm under with ICANN for anvilwalrusden.com to affect
my agreement with CIRA for crankycanuck.ca).  So, first, can we agree
that we're only talking about regulating specific actions (blue shirt
wearing or not) and not people (all non-blue-shirt-wearers)?

I agree it's an example of a sort of tying we don't want: a rule on
behaviour unrelated to anything to do with the domain name itself.
But there's clearly another group of behaviours that are relevant to
domain names in that they're enabled by such domain names.  I think
you and I both want those not to be regulated, but I don't see how to
state it such that we don't also accidentally scoop up whois policies.
I thought that's what we were talking about, until we started talking
about regulating people.  

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com