<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Malcolm,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Do we need an additional clause that prohibits the "blue shirt" policy? I would contend that the basic statement about ICANN's mission is sufficient to prohibit such a policy. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Greg</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Malcolm Hutty <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:malcolm@linx.net" target="_blank">malcolm@linx.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
<br>
> On 20 Nov 2015, at 17:07, Mueller, Milton L <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> 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.<br>
<br>
</span>Milton,<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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).<br>
<br>
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).<br>
<br>
I could live with that, in default of something better.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Malcolm.<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>