[CCWG-ACCT] Proposed Mission & Core Values: Could they interfere with ICANN enforcement of contracts?

[James Gannon]

I think Malcom has put it better than I could, as long as the policy is within ICANNs mission then the enforcement of such is not at risk.
This caveat is important to constrain ICANN to its mission through not only policy but also through compliance, without this we risk ICANN compliance stepping into grey areas of regulation in areas that ICANN has no business being in.

-James Gannon


> On 26 Aug 2015, at 17:07, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 26/08/2015 16:47, Steve DelBianco wrote:
>> On our Tuesday CCWG call, I raised questions from the BC and IPC about
>> whether the new Mission & Core Values could be interpreted to prevent
>> ICANN from enforcing certain aspects of registrar and registry contracts. 
> 
> The question of registry and registrar contracts is an entirely "second
> order" question.
> 
> If the policy is within ICANN's Mission, then enforcing it through
> registrar and registry contracts is also within ICANN's Mission.
> 
> Should ICANN adopt a policy outside its Mission, then enforcement of it
> through contracts would also be ultra vires.
> 
> So as long as you're not worried about the policy itself, you don't have
> any reason to worry about the contract compliance side of things.
> 
> Malcolm
> -- 
>            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
>   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
> London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
> 
>                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
>           21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY
> 
>         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
>       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community