<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Comments below.<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2012/08/30 11:40 PM, David Conrad
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:74E6E47E-4A41-41F4-B8AD-496CE37AF925@virtualized.org"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>
<div>Parminder,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On Aug 29, 2012, at 11:21 PM, parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><font face="Verdana">I
will cut out both the chaff and the detail, sticking to
the main issue we are discussing here. </font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Actually, I was attempting to understand the rationale
someone might use to assert ICANN is not subject to US law
since you stated ICANN apologists did this, but I get that you
don't want to talk about your earlier statement.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><font face="Verdana">This
to me is a convincing case that we should develop and
propose a clear alternative for CIR management that is not
dependent on the laws and executive authority of one
country. <br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I suspect many, if not all, of the folks you deride as
"status quoists" would simply respond with "great idea, now
where's that proposal for a clear alternative again?" <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Are we still here? For me it means it is 1) performative (i.e.
action in the making), 2) evolutionary (unless there is a crisis of
"vision")<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:74E6E47E-4A41-41F4-B8AD-496CE37AF925@virtualized.org"
type="cite">
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><font face="Verdana">Basically,
in the circumstances, the only option is to base ICANN on
international law, with a host country agreement and
immunities for its functions vis a vis its physical
location. </font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As this is not my area of expertise, can you point to a
similar case where a private organization has been based on
international law and granted immunities? I'm curious as to
how such organizations originated and evolved.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
WIPO, as stated previously.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:74E6E47E-4A41-41F4-B8AD-496CE37AF925@virtualized.org"
type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><font face="Verdana">And
the only way to make international law is for all
countries to get together and make it, while it being a
fully open and participative process for everyone else.</font></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I thought most (all?) international law was the result of
treaties between governments which may or may not be the
result of "a fully open and participative process for everyone
else". In fact, my impression has been that most
international law was sort of the opposite of "fully open and
participative".</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
You are correct. In fact, much of multilateralism faces hegemonic
bias of the "opposite of the third world" (i.e. the developed
countries/EU+US+collaborators et al). Nowadays it is less so, but
still very much the same. The faith that developing countries have
in collective solutions shows a commitment to legitimacy/cooperation
that rich countries rhetoric belies.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:74E6E47E-4A41-41F4-B8AD-496CE37AF925@virtualized.org"
type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>-drc</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>