[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement

[Malcolm Hutty]

> On 20 Nov 2015, at 17:07, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
> 
> Arguably, this the UDRP is 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.  

Milton,

This clause would not prevent ICANN from adopting a policy that all registrants within a particular gTLD (or all of them) must wear blue shirts on Thursdays, nor from enforcing such a prohibition through the RA/RAA. 

I would prefer a clause that did prohibit such a policy, but I cannot find a form of words to which others will agree; every effort so far has been shot down as allegedly too likely to prohibit things that I agree ICANN should do (like WHOIS, UDRP, or regulating the registration process). 

We therefore have a compromise text. This is not comprehensive in prohibiting to ICANN the full range of regulatory behaviour that I think it should really be restrained from engaging in, but it does deal with the most "high risk" area: attempting to regulate what is "done on the Internet", as in, what is done by software processes that accept Internet connections (or the content they process). 

I could live with that, in default of something better. 

Malcolm.