[CCWG-Accountability] Related work on ICANN's Public Interest
Eric Brunner-Williams
ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Wed Dec 17 21:20:34 UTC 2014
On 12/17/14 8:53 AM, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
> Certainly I would regard it as being in the public interest that ICANN
> should discharge its functions properly, and in accordance with generally
> accepted principles of law.
Dear Malcolm,
What "generally accepted principles of law" do you suggest apply to the
management of protocol parameters?
Similarly, what "generally accepted principles of law" do you suggest
apply to the management of globally unique address identifiers?
And finally, what "generally accepted principles of law" do you suggest
apply to the management of globally unique resource-to-address
identifiers (domain names)?
There is of course, from the Green and White Papers period, competition
policy and a transition from an incumbent monopoly contract to a
competitive regime, but other than that, where do the "generally
accepted principles of law" properly inform the party or parties
conducting each of these three management activities?
Where, among the "generally accepted principles of law" would one look
for support of the proposition that adding labels in the Han Script to
the IANA root zone is in "the public interest"?
Similarly, where would one look for support of the proposition that
allocation of scarce v4 addresses not be made solely upon the basis of
highest price offered?
And finally, where would one look for support of the proposition that
algorithms for signing zones include the GOST suite?
My point being that when the IANA Functions are as narrowly construed as
we can sensibly make them, "public interest" and "generally accepted
principles of law" are difficult to find points of association, let
alone concordance.
Regards,
Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list