[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Miss ion statement)

[Paul Rosenzweig]

Ahhhh.  So what formulation of the restrictions do you support?  Or have you changed your mind?
--
Paul
Sent from myMail app for Android Saturday, 21 November 2015, 09:28PM -06:00 from Alan Greenberg < alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> :

>That is your explanation, not mine...
>
>At 21/11/2015 09:57 PM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>
>>I don't disagre....  we go
too fast
>>
>>--
>>Sent from myMail app for Android
>>Saturday, 21 November 2015, 09:43PM -05:00 from Alan Greenberg
< alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca >:
>>
>>And I continue to be very troubled that in haste, we may put into
words, Bylaws that ultimately prevent ICANN from doing its legitimate
business.
>>Alan
>>At 21/11/2015 10:35 AM, Paul Rosenzweig wrote:
>>
>>>I agree with Malcolm.  I continue to be very troubled that we
cannot put into words this very fundamental concept.  All agree
there are some limited circumstances when ICANN can and should be allowed
to impose restrictions on activity through contract.   All
agree that there are many other circumstances in which that sort of
action by ICANN would be illegitimate.  The Board's proposal seems
to leave the question open to later interpretation and for that reason I
don't favor it -- but I also think it is imperative that some
definitional language be hammered out .... without it the entire premise
of IRP review and a limited ICANN mission founders.
>>>Paul
>>>--
Sent from myMail app for Android
Friday, 20 November 2015, 07:52PM -05:00 from Malcolm Hutty
< malcolm at linx.net >:
>>>
>>>
>>>On 20 Nov 2015, at 21:39, Andrew Sullivan
< ajs at anvilwalrusden.com > wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 03:54:09PM -0500, David Post wrote:
>> This is a good example - can ICANN shut down my domain as
part of its
>> "collaboration with anti-abuse people"?
> 
> Unless you&apos;re a TLD, ICANN can&apos;t shut down
your domain anyway (at
> least not without taking a whole bunch of other people out), so
if
> that&apos;s all we&apos;re talking about it&apos;s
not a problem.
>>>On the contrary, ICANN can and does cause Registries to shut down
some registrants&apos; domains (by requiring them to redelegate it to
another person without the initial registrants&apos; consent). 
>>>We are arguing about the scope of circumstances in which ICANN should
be permitted to do this. Constraining the range of circumstances is the
entire point of this clause. 
>>>
>>>Malcolm. 
_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>_______________________________________________
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/20151122/2c1a2755/attachment.html>