[governance] Is ICANN "engaged in commerce" ?

[Mawaki Chango]

I see. As you probably may have understood, that is not exactly
my own argument. 

More than once I've worried that the debates within the GNSO
Council make the ICANN policy body look like a confederation (or
whatever) of "trade union" delegates, each one arguing mainly
for their sectoral interests. Individual participants sometimes
(or maybe often) have little knowledge at a global scale, e.g.
legal- and policy-wise, of what they are asking for, with
analytical scope reduced to corporate particular interests. I
guess that is in line with the "invisible hand" worldview
whereby the general interest is merely the collection of the
particular ones.

After all, as far as I can tell, that view is widely dominant
(or strong) in the US domestic policy venues and debates. And
now I wonder, is it that surprising to see this happen with
ICANN (where public policy authority is even more elusive, if
anything)?

Mawaki

--- "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
<froomkin at law.miami.edu> wrote:

> strongly disagree - there would have been fewer costs and far
> fewer suits 
> if they had set up simple and neutral rules.  It's keeping the
> lid on the 
> artificial scarcity that has consumed resources and caused
> people to sue 
> them.
> 
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> 
> > Certianly, certainly! But what would you say to those who
> argue
> > that ICANN had no choice getting into those non-technical
> issues
> > for at least a somehow practical reason: avoid lawsuits and
> the
> > bankruptcy that might ensue?
> >
> > Mawaki
> >
> >
> > --- Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> >>
> >>> This unequivocally underscores the public interest nature
> >> and purpose of
> >>> ICANN. ICANN is not "engaged in commerce" but is a
> structure
> >> set up to
> >>> serve the global public interest. Too many people seem to
> >> forget it.
> >>
> >> Despite ICANN's statement to the contrary, ICANN is most
> >> certainly
> >> engaged in commerce of the worst sort, and to my mind, a
> most
> >> improper,
> >> sort.
> >>
> >> ICANN can say many things.  Words are cheap.  But what
> ICANN
> >> does belies
> >> and supersedes what it says.
> >>
> >> ICANN stands astride the marketplace of domain names. 
> ICANN
> >> engages in
> >> social, economic, and economic planning, largely on behalf
> of
> >> two
> >> incumbent groups - the intellectual property aggregation
> (as
> >> opposed to
> >> the intellectual property creation) industry and the DNS
> >> registry
> >> industry.  There is very little "public interest" or
> "public
> >> benefit" in
> >> that process.
> >>
> >> What is commerce?  It is the ebb and flow of goods and
> >> services, vendors
> >> and consumers, innovators and builders.  ICANN not only
> swims
> >> in the
> >> waters of commerce; ICANN intends to affect, and does
> effect,
> >> the
> >> streams of commerce.  What are those trademarks that ICANN
> >> tries so hard
> >> to protect but the marks used to identify and distinguish
> the
> >> goods and
> >> services flowing in the channels of commerce?  And what are
> >> the registry
> >> fees except the prices that are paid by one group in
> commerce
> >> to another
> >> group engaged in commerce?
> >>
> >> Indeed, virtually everything ICANN does is in commerce. 
> ICANN
> >> does not
> >> so much engage in commerce as it attempts to regulate it.
> >> Indeed, it is
> >> fair to describe ICANN as a combination of incumbent
> economic
> >> interests
> >> that seeks to restrain the trade in domain name products
> and
> >> services.
> >>
> >> Which is sad because ICANN has left undone exactly those
> >> things it was
> >> created to do.
> >>
> >> ICANN was created to deal with some very limited technical
> >> issues.
> >> ICANN has not handled even one of those issues. 
> Consequently
> >> the same
> >> risks of internet instability that ICANN was intended to
> cure
> >> remain.
> >> Internet users and internet providers, people and
> businesses,
> >> are at
> >> risk of internet instability because ICANN has abandoned
> its
> >> post.
> >>
> >> The internet community needed ICANN to be a fireman to
> protect
> >> against
> >> DNS fires.  Instead, ICANN has abandoned the firehouse and
> >> moved uptown.
> >>
> >> 		--karl--
> >>
> >>
> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >>
> >> For all list information and functions, see:
> >>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >>
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> > For all list information and functions, see:
> >     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> >
> 
> -- 
> http://www.icannwatch.org   Personal Blog:
> http://www.discourse.net
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |  
> froomkin at law.tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL
> 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  | 
> http://www.law.tm
>                         -->It's warm here.<--
> 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance