<p dir="ltr">Hello,</p>
<p dir="ltr">From a personal view, this is where I was hoping we did soon arrive at. So if we are able to figure out how to form an inclusive and legitimate trust then fine, otherwise I'd say there is existing legitimate trust (close to multistakeholder) that should be able to serve this purpose.</p>
<p dir="ltr">@Milton, I did agree with you that initially it would look like it's easier to sperate the functions (especially on paper). However when you look at it in years to come, you would realize the multiple monsters that would have been created. Unfortunately some who are here may have retired by then and it will be left to that generation to figure out. Just like the situation we are finding ourselves right now with ICANN; I fear I may be part of that generation and that's one of my motivations.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Cheers!</p>
<p dir="ltr">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
kindly excuse brevity and typos.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 16 Nov 2014 12:44, "Avri Doria" <<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
Hi,<br>
<br>
I am not a lawyer, so any repsonse I give is suspect.<br>
<br>
In any case, Trusts are you say very varied over jurisdictions. The
have existed forever, from what I read (not only wikipedia) since
Roman times or before. In fact I think I remember reading about
them in some obscure Latin lesson half way through the last century.<br>
<br>
In essence the way I understand them is that some who has an asset
of value, for example stewardship of the IANA contract, gives that
item in trust to an intermediary, the adminstrator, to hold and
administer for the trustee - the Internet community.<br>
<br>
It is true I do not know the exact form of a Trust or Trust-like
arrangement that would work. For that one would need someone who
was an expert in international trusts to determine what, if any, mix
of available trust elements could be brougth together to achieve the
goal. I guess I have so much faith in lawyers that I believe that
they can create an appropriate piece of paper to create any sort of
needed legal arrangement; in this case a trust to hold the IANA
contract for the Global Internet Community.<br>
<br>
What I am looking for is:<br>
<br>
- a minimalist solution that changes what is necessary to account
for NTIA transfer of stewardship, but does not try to solve every
possible complaint the contracted parties might have about IANA
performance.<br>
<br>
- a solution that allows full separability of IANA from ICANN, but
which does require that separation, especially not at this time. <br>
<br>
- a solution that does not build yet another entity for handling
IANA that is subject to the same growth dynamics as ICANN, which was
created for handling IANA. <br>
<br>
- a soltion that does not lead us in the slicing IANA into many
little ianas. (It is ironic that the IANA stewardship transition
process may result in the yet another form of Internet
fragmentation)<br>
<br>
<br>
In may ways I think we have confused the work in our exegisis of the
contract. The primary thing that is changing in terms of
Stewardship is who gets to decide that the contract should be either
renewed or awarded elsewhere. That is what we should focus on.<br>
<br>
That is why I am suggesting a Trust, or some other Trust-like legal
relationship, where the IANA contract is put in trust for the
global Internet Community and there is a mechanism by which the
multistakeholder community can be brought together when necessary
for critical decisions, like reviewing performance before making a
contract recommendation.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<div>On 14-Nov-14 05:35, Guru Acharya wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi Avri and Greg,
This is with reference to the Strawman 4 added to the matrix:
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kO8dtSdkTnH79FSUsxA8KmPv1O2IfYwYFm2k_CIoNMw/edit" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kO8dtSdkTnH79FSUsxA8KmPv1O2IfYwYFm2k_CIoNMw/edit</a>
While I am familiar with how trusts operate in my country, I am not able to
comprehend the use of trusts as done in Strawman 4. Maybe someone can help
explain the nature of laws under which this proposal is being contemplated.
As I understand, trusts are generally established between three legal
entities: the author, trustee and the beneficiary.
The person who reposes or declares the confidence is called the “author of
the trust”; The person who accepts the confidence is called the “trustee”;
the person for whose benefit the confidence is accepted is called the
“beneficiary”.
In Strawman 4, who are these entities?
There is reference to a ICG like panel without any legal status - I suppose
a committee within ICANN - is that the beneficiary? Who are you proposing
the trustee be? Are you suggesting that that the trustee contract the IANA
operator (ICANN) on behalf of the beneficiary (also ICANN)?
I'm not able to see how all of this works - Maybe someone could help
explain.
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Cwg-rfp3 mailing list
<a href="mailto:Cwg-rfp3@icann.org" target="_blank">Cwg-rfp3@icann.org</a>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Cwg-rfp3 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cwg-rfp3@icann.org">Cwg-rfp3@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp3</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>