[CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition

[Nigel Roberts]

The Weinstein appeal will give a strong indicator on whether the rights 
to .MIL and .GOV are a form of property.

What must be really worrying from the right-wing in the USA is that 
(unless I'm mistaken) there's no carve out from ICANN (claimed) 
authority over .MIL/GOV as being any different from .COM/NET

It's just that ICANN's left the legacy gTLDs alone these last 15 years.

But a different ICANN, in a different juridsiction might, er, think 
differently.



On 27/05/16 18:07, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
> So,
>
> that means nobody has ANY idea of it chanes of this going through,
> and the issue or property remains unsettled.
>
> Neve rmind that the level of ignorance displayed is staggering (the
> reference to RFC1591).nd .
>
> greetings, el
>
> On 2016-05-27 17:51 , Phil Corwin wrote:
>> The chances of this bill becoming law are close to zero, unless it
>> is attached to a larger "must pass" bill or added as a rider to an
>> appropriations measure.
>>
>> I'm not sure that the concept of "ownership" is a good fit for a
>> TLD, but that language could always be modified to something along
>> the lines of "permanent control".
>>
>>
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
> [...]
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
>> avri doria
>> Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:28 PM
>> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Two questions:
>>
>> - what are the chances that this becomes law
>>
>> - doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this?
>>
>> avri
> [...]