But if that's the meaning of the laguage, shouldn't we still be worried about it? I would think that the mission statement SHOULD "prohibit ICANN from imposing other obligations on registries/registrars," no? That is, ICANN should not be permitted to impose obligations on registries/registrars, by contract or otherwise, obligations that are not within its mission - doesn't this language cut dramatically against that? David At 04:04 PM 8/18/2015, Paul Rosenzweig wrote: >Ahhh … in context I think this is clear (or at >least it is to me). The concern was that by >restricting ICANN’s mission and prohibiting it >from regulating services or content we might >inadvertently be also prohibiting ICANN for >imposing other obligations on >registries/registrars. All this is intended to >say (and the language may be inartful) is that >the mission limitation on regulation of services >and content does not OTHERWISE limit the >remaining contractual authorities of >ICANN. That, at least, was the thrust of the >conversation in Paris and that is what this >summary in para 158 is intended to capture. > >Paul > >Paul Rosenzweig ><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask] > >O: +1 (202) 547-0660 >M: +1 (202) 329-9650 >VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 >Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066 ><http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9>Link >to my PGP Key > > >From: Mueller, Milton L [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 2:54 PM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: "Limitations on ICANN's contracting authority." > >I was reading the CCWG proposal and had one of those WTF moments…. > >Can someone who was in Paris or who was more >involved in CCWG tell me what this means: > >“The CCWG-Accountability …concluded that the >prohibition on regulation of services that use >the Internet’s unique identifiers or the content that >they carry or provide does not act as a >restraint on ICANN’s contracting authority.” > >WHAT??? > >Since ICANN regulates by contracts with >registries and registrars, the prohibition on >regulation of services that use the Internet’s >unique identifiers or the content that they >carry or provide had bloody well better limit >ICANN’s ability to regulate services and content >via contracts, otherwise it doesn’t prohibit >anything. Am I missing something here? > >Dr. Milton L. Mueller >Professor, School of Public Policy >Georgia Institute of Technology > > ******************************* David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications etc. http://www.davidpost.com *******************************