[governance] US Congrerss & JPA

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

It is not impossible to imagine ways of rooting ICANN in, say, California 
private law once it's 'set free', but it is not easy, and hard to make 
stick without something as heavy-duty as a treaty.  So in practice, I 
think the two issues are more tightly coupled than advocates of the 'cut 
ICANN loose' vision want to admit.

I'd say, if I were ICANN's lawyer, that I'd want to move to Geneva about 
four seconds after the US government cut the tether.  And I bet the 
contingency plan to do just that is not just fully written, but years old.

On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> Karl I think your heart is in the right place on these issues but you do 
> the world a disservice by lending credence to this bogus "who lost the 
> Internet" argument. Maybe if we were talking about the IANA 
> contract....but the JPA????
>
> Your points about contracts are money flows are very good, but ICANN can 
> remain rooted in California law - or any other jurisdictional basis for 
> private contracts - without having an overlay of a politicized national 
> government department looking over its shoulder.
>
> In other words, don't confuse the issue of US unilateral 
> oversight/control with the issue of ICANN's jurisdictional home for 
> private law. They are quite distinct.

-- 
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