[CCWG-ACCT] [CCWG-Accountability] On legal advise concerning California non-profits

[Dr Eberhard Lisse]

Eric,

I was not looking at it from that perspective, but Becky make sense,
ie if we get an opinion that is contrary to what ICANN has
previously asserted in court it would put ICANN in a difficult
position.

Almost as much as their Counsel estopping ICANN on anything not yet
litigated.


So, we need "unconflicted" Counsel.

el

On 2015-01-22 16:49, Burr, Becky wrote:
> Eric, I have great respect for the ICANN legal staff, but I¹m not
> aware that anyone on staff possesses legal expertise on
> international law and/or California not-for-profit law.  More that
> that, we know that ICANN has asserted various limitations on some
> of the accountability mechanisms based on the ³fiduciary duty²
> of Board members to the corporation.  Whether the ideas in
> question are good or bad, there is some skepticism - and a
> conclusion by the Berkman Center during the first ATRT review that
> additional legal research was needed, about the legal positions
> asserted by ICANN¹s legal staff and its outside counsel.  Given
> the above, and ethical obligation of counsel to defend the views
> of its client vigorously, I disagree with your view that ICANN¹s
> counsel is well situated to provide the legal analysis we need.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> J. Beckwith Burr

[...]