[governance] "Oversight"

[John Curran]

On Jun 4, 2012, at 9:18 AM, David Conrad wrote:

> John,
> 
> On Jun 4, 2012, at 6:17 AM, John Curran wrote:
>> Indeed, ICANN can remove entire top-level-domains (such as a ccTLD)
> 
> As described in my previous note, this is not the case.

  Thanks for the correction - my summary was too terse, as your review
  of the process proves.  I was trying to say that a court order, once
  delivered to ICANN instructing them to take action to remove a TLD,
  could result in that outcome if ICANN then initiated the process and
  it ran to conclusion.  I don't believe that would happen due to the
  need for it to go through DoC (and hence my comment that we are not
  "aware how ICANN/DoC would respond") but you also highlight another
  protection, in that the results would need to be accepted by the 
  root server operators.

>> That is going to be the case for some entity no matter how you set up
>> Internet governance in this area.
> 
> One of the reasons for the Byzantine nature of the current set up is to remove the risk of a single entity from being able to do precisely this. 

  Understood, and indeed ICANN and the USG/DoC has gone through some 
  extensive work to protect against unilateral changes; I doubt we'll
  see that attention to detail in the future.
 
Thanks again,
/John

Disclaimers:  My views alone. The information in this email is a summary of 
key concepts; you should read the full materials before mentally investing.
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t