[ianatransition] Disaster scenarios (was Re: Jurisdiction)

John Curran jcurran at istaff.org
Tue Aug 5 19:54:12 UTC 2014

On Aug 5, 2014, at 3:07 PM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:

> I guess what I'm thinking during all of your scenario:
>  But what if the court is right (and IANA is wrong)?
> Perhaps "right" is too strong a term but courts tend to lay out their
> reasoning in decisions and even if you might wish they'd come to a
> different decision that doesn't necessarily mean: To The Barricades!
> Even if the decision represents an inconvenience.

Agreed, however...

There has to be a shared fundamental belief by the community that the
multistakeholder protocol and registry policy development model (when
based on open, inclusive, and transparent processes) produces "correct" 
outcomes for Internet administration, so as long as compatible with 
established global norms with respect to public policy matters.

If that's not the case, then we can save a lot of time and effort by
simply handing all of these matters over to whatever court you think 
is going to produce "right" answers every time...

> ...
> One could say most court cases represent a failure by the parties
> involved to resolve a matter so one or more seeks the authority of the
> court.

And many would say it is indeed essential that there is an ability for 
some external legal or arbitration process... The question is actually
in defining what would be a valid basis for seeking redress; would it be 
limited to arbitration for faithful adherence to the governance documents 
and principles (e.g. as would likely be the case under Richard's suggested 
immunity of jurisdiction approach) or would it somehow allow a single 
government to legislate independent policy outcomes for Internet identifier 
administration, even when explicitly in contravention of adopted policy.


Disclaimer: My views alone.

More information about the ianatransition mailing list