Hi Pranesh, I have read your piece and while on the surface I am sympathetic to the concerns raised, I am also pragmatic. What is the alternative that you seek? Also, there has been a similar discussion on the CCWG-Accountability list over the past few days. I'm not sure if you have seen it, but I found this reply from Phillip Corwin, which I have pasted below, to be very compelling. I do not recall reading any disagreements with his remarks - but if you do object to it, I would be happy to read your rebuttal. Best wishes, Ayden ==== With all respect, the reason that many of us regard this discussion as nonproductive is that no compelling case has been made for embarking on the path proposed, and no proper recognition has been made by the proponent of the costs and difficulties involved. For example: “There is accordingly no reason why we cannot have international law that protects individual and business rights vis a vis a international body (that ICANN should become under international law). To repeat, there is absolutely no problem with developing an international treaty that writes international law, which will make ICANN an international body, but with exactly the same governance and other processes (multistakeholder) as exist at present, and also provide means to ensure that individuals/ businesses interests and rights vis a vis ICANN are protected through a special court system that is set up by the same treaty. So you are proposing, just for this one ICANN organization and its very limited remit, spending an enormous amount of time and money (for legal expertise, plus the value of the time of all those involved stakeholders) to hammer out a new international treaty to implemented, as well as the development of “international law” that is relevant to all concerns that may arise for disputes within and involving ICANN. Contract law, employment law, competition/antitrust law, etc., ad infinitum. How long will all this take? Years, I would submit. And from what more important issues will the ICANN community be distracted while embarking on this herculean effort? And what would that law be? For example, for competition/antitrust as it relates to domain industry pricing within the framework of ICANN policies and contractual practices, shall it be the US approach, the EU's, some other nation's, or some amalgamation of them? And how long and at what expense shall that effort take? And from what source is the authority of the authors of these “laws” derived; in democratic nations legislators derive their authority by gathering majority support of voters, but ICANN is not a nation-state. And, oh yes, we are also supposed to create “a special court system that is set up by the same treaty” to decide disputes under this new body of law created just for ICANN. How many jurists? What substantive requirements, and evidentiary standards, and procedural rules? What mechanism of appeal and to what body? I would submit that this whole proposed project is quite absurd, especially given the lack of any convincing rationale to so many of us that such a project is even required to address any foreseeable dispute. Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal Virtualaw LLC 1155 F Street, NW Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20004 202-559-8597/Direct 202-559-8750/Fax 202-255-6172/cell “Luck is the residue of design” -- Branch Rickey
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 4:42 PM, Mueller, Milton L [log in to unmask]
wrote:
Ayden Férdeline |