[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon Nov 23 03:06:43 UTC 2015


I rarely fill people's mailboxes just to do this, but in this case;

+1

Alan


At 22/11/2015 08:31 PM, Silver, Bradley wrote:

>I want to echo and support Greg’s response 
>below.  Milton’s position that an existing 
>provision of the RAA is out of the scope of 
>ICANN’s mission is illuminating.  I had been 
>operating on the (hopeful) presumption that what 
>we were attempting to do was find a way to 
>describe ICANN’s mission in a manner that 
>reflects its current activities, and avoid 
>drafting anything that could adversely impact 
>its continued ability to do so while clearly 
>preventing any undue expansion.   If those who 
>support the language in the second sentence are 
>seeking a way to attack the validity or 
>enforceability of existing contractual 
>provisions, then the concerns of the board are 
>not only well founded, they are grossly understated.
>
>From: 
>accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
>[mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] 
>On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
>Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 3:01 AM
>To: Mueller, Milton L
>Cc: Accountability Cross Community
>Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on the Mission statement
>
>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 <<mailto:milton at gatech.edu>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>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
><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>=================================================================
>Reminder: Any email that requests your login 
>credentials or that asks you to click on a link 
>could be a phishing attack.  If you have any 
>questions regarding the authenticity of this 
>email or its sender, please contact the IT 
>Service Desk at 212.484.6000 or via email at 
><mailto:ITServices at timewarner.com>ITServices at timewarner.com
>
>
>=================================================================
>
>=================================================================
>This message is the property of Time Warner Inc. 
>and is intended only for the use of the
>addressee(s) and may be legally privileged 
>and/or confidential. If the reader of this message
>is not the intended recipient, or the employee 
>or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended
>recipient, he or she is hereby notified that any 
>dissemination, distribution, printing, forwarding,
>or any method of copying of this information, 
>and/or the taking of any action in reliance on
>the information herein is strictly prohibited 
>except by the intended recipient or those to whom
>he or she intentionally distributes this 
>message. If you have received this communication in
>error, please immediately notify the sender, and 
>delete the original message and any copies
>from your computer or storage system. Thank you.
>=================================================================
>_______________________________________________
>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/be3c6772/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list