[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement

[Greg Shatan]

Milton,

I strongly disagree that 3.7.7 is out of scope of ICANN's mission.  I also
don't think it's useless, nor is it an uncommon provision in many terms of
service and similar agreements.  3.7.7 only asks for the registrant's
"knowledge and belief" -- so they are not required to know whether they are
infringing anywhere under any jurisdiction.  They are only required to make
reference to what they already know -- an entirely reasonable and ordinary
requirement.

Is it your intent that the new provision we are discussing places 3.7.7 out
of scope, and thus serves as a basis for an IRP or other challenge seeking
to nullify 3.7.7?  Since 3.7.7 is only an "example," what other sections
are you trying to place out of scope?

Thanks.

Greg

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > See section 3.7.7 of the registrar accreditation agreement (RAA):
> > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en
> >
> > 3.7.7.9 The Registered Name Holder shall represent that, to the best of
> the
> > Registered Name Holder's knowledge and belief, neither the registration
> of
> > the Registered Name nor the manner in which it is directly or indirectly
> used
> > infringes the legal rights of any third party.
>
> Bruce: this is a good example of how the RAA is currently out of scope. To
> begin with, it is a completely useless element of the RAA. This statement
> does not stop anyone from doing anything, and it does not require ICANN to
> determine whether a registrant is infringing someone's rights. And how is
> anyone supposed to know whether the way they use a domain infringes the
> legal rights of a third party - anywhere in the world, under any
> jurisdiction?  They cannot know this until and  unless someone asserts
> those rights against them in a legal system which has jurisdiction and can
> make a legal determination. Or do we want ICANN to be making this
> determination? Most would agree that we do not. So what is the purpose,
> other than to invite ICANN to impose controls or regulations on virtually
> anything that happens on the internet?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151122/178b9c35/attachment-0001.html>