<div dir="ltr">Hi all, Chris:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 May 2015 at 11:12, Chris Disspain <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ceo@auda.org.au" target="_blank">ceo@auda.org.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><span style="font-family:'Verdana';font-size:13px;color:rgb(102,102,102)"><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>What if the only way the UA acts is on resolution of the SO Council?</div><div><br></div><div>Its bylaws could easily say that.</div><div><br></div><div>In which case, it has no initiative at all, and has no means by which to "act" other than by decision of the SO it acts for.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span>Yup, but unless you can sue it, you can’t actually stop it from ignoring you or doing it’s own thing acting outside its bylaws. In other words, it is no different to ICANN ignoring its by law that says the SOs can veto the budget. </span></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>In a way, isn't that quite like saying you can't sue yourself? ;-)</div><div><br></div><div>More seriously, I am pretty confident that members of an unincorporated association CAN sue it, UNLIKE the situation for participants in ICANN SOs and ACs who do not have standing to sue the corporation.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><span style="font-family:'Verdana';font-size:13px;color:rgb(102,102,102)"><div><br></div><div>And, of course, this all may be acceptable to the various SOs and ACs but I do want us to be clear what we are buying in to!<br><div>
<p><br></p></div></div></span></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Clarity is indeed vital.</div><div><br>J</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><span style="font-family:'Verdana';font-size:13px;color:rgb(102,102,102)"><div><div><p></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p><br></p>
<p>Chris</p>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<br><div><div>On 2 May 2015, at 08:44 , Jordan Carter <<a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>> wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Chris, these are great questions -thank you for answering them. <div><br></div><div>Here is my take on this one...:</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 May 2015 at 10:28, Chris Disspain <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ceo@auda.org.au" target="_blank">ceo@auda.org.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>Thanks.</div><div><br></div><div>I'll assume it attempts to. Here's what is says:</div><div><br></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><span>"The control mechanism for an SO/AC over its unincorporated association could be essentially the same as whatever control mechanisms currently exist to ensure that </span><span>the SO/ACs do what their participants collectively decide they should do. <b>For example, if an SO/AC has a chair, that chair could be empowered and directed by the participants in the SO/AC to cause the unincorporated association of that SO/AC to act as dir</b></span><span><b>ected by the SO/AC to exercise membership or designator rights.</b> If the chair refused, that chair could presumably be subjected to discipline or removed and replaced under existing procedures within the SO or AC, just as if the chair had refused to take an</span><span>y other action as directed by the SO/AC. If existing control mechanisms within SO/ACs are insufficient, the SO/AC could modify them to address the weakness."</span></span></div><div><br></div><div>I refer to the text in bold. I agree. However this does not answer the question, "and what power of enforcement over the UA does the SO or AC have if the UA refuses to act as directed or if it starts to act on its own behalf without direction?".</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What if the only way the UA acts is on resolution of the SO Council?</div><div><br></div><div>Its bylaws could easily say that.</div><div><br></div><div>In which case, it has no initiative at all, and has no means by which to "act" other than by decision of the SO it acts for.</div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><br></div><div>This is and has been the point I have been making for the last day or so. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It is an extremely important point.</div><div><br></div><div>cheers</div><div>Jordan</div><div> </div></div>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ</b><br><br><a href="tel:04%20495%202118" value="+6444952118" target="_blank">04 495 2118</a> (office) | <a href="tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649" value="+6421442649" target="_blank">+64 21 442 649</a> (mob)<br><a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> <br>Skype: jordancarter<br><br><i>A better world through a better Internet </i><br><br></div></div></div>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></span></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ</b><br><br>04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)<br><a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> <br>Skype: jordancarter<br><br><i>A better world through a better Internet </i><br><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>