[Ws2-jurisdiction] Blog post on ICANN's jurisdiction

[Paul Rosenzweig]

+1

Paul Rosenzweig
paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
O: +1 (202) 547-0660
M: +1 (202) 329-9650
VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739
www.redbranchconsulting.com
My PGP Key:
https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684

-----Original Message-----
From: ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:ws2-jurisdiction-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nigel Roberts
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 3:47 AM
To: ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-jurisdiction] Blog post on ICANN's jurisdiction


> and innumerable others. In the circumstances, the real waiver across 
> all sectors and laws would be seek immunity under the US International 
> Organisations Immunity Act. Would you not prefer this route? If not, 
> why so?

Because I do not want ICANN to have immunity.

I have been involved in this community since before it was called 'ICANN',
including the gTLD-MoU and the IFWP.

I have seen ICANN behave as an autocrat robber baron and deprive people of
their property.

Fortunately, we have made great strides since then.

Accountability work, between 2003 (in the case of ccTLDs) up to last years'
transition, as well as the fact that, both staff and Board now have personal
trust, that was totally absent 15 years ago.

But both organisations and personnnel can change.

Institutional immunity leads to corruption. I do not want ICANN to become a
FIFA, or IOC.

And the recent .AFRICA case shows, the checks and balances of the US
judicial system appear to work reasonably well (I personally remain uneasy
about the covenant of immunity but I expect you have no problem with that).

I trust this explains why some people - and I am one - may have a
diametrically opposed view to yours when it comes to ICANN immunity.



_______________________________________________
Ws2-jurisdiction mailing list
Ws2-jurisdiction at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-jurisdiction