[governance] Big Porn v. Big Web Ruling Could Spell Trouble for ICANN / was Re: new gTLDs

[McTim]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> Avri and Ian,
>
> Will weigh in with more responses to your and other's comments later on when
> I have a little more time, but just to say for the present that;
>
> Firstly, IANA function that US may or may not hand over to someone else, in
> one issue. Another one, the main one in the present thread, is, whether IANA
> function is voluntary abandoned or not by the US (your choice of what should
> happen), ICANN as a US non profit would remain subject to all kinds of US
> laws vis a vis all its activities and policies. As a part of the .xxx
> judgement for instance, the courts can ask ICANN to revise all its domain
> name policies to bring them in accordance with US anti trust and possibly
> other laws (say IP related), in 'such a such', manner. ICANN would have no
> option other than to do it right away.


Not true, they would certainly appeal if they lost (which they won't).
 The new gTLD fee
was high, mostly because the US is a litigious place.  They are well
capable of defending
themselves.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

-------------- 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