[discuss] Some more legal tangles for ICANN

Tue Jul 1 18:46:04 UTC 2014

At 18:41 01/07/2014, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>I have NO IDEA what this means.
>
>But if I use Google Translate to translate it first into French, and 
>then into Swahili, it makes more sense then.

Hi! Nigel,
I hope proceeding that way helped you finding back your missing 
trouser? or was it jacket? :-)
Best
Alliance

>On 07/01/2014 05:12 PM, FSP4NET wrote:
>>At 11:57 28/06/2014, Chris Disspain wrote:
>>>>However if you think this particular 'point of law' has no
>>>>implication to the legal and jurisdictional status of ICANN and the
>>>>important global governance functions that is does, I will rest my
>>>>case here.
>>>
>>>Speaking as a lawyer and a ccTLD manager a) I would be wary of drawing
>>>'points of law' from a news story and b) even if the report is
>>>accurate, the decision does not have any implication to the legal and
>>>jurisdictional status of ICANN.
>>
>>Dear Chris,
>>
>>Speaking as people caring about their glocal digitality: a) we would be
>>wary of drawing technical operational trust from any comment on points
>>of any law and b) we would avoid using services of which the stability
>>and continuity could be subject to legal and juridictional issues. Our
>>need is for our machines to work 24/366 with the least possible
>>technical support and no legal counsel.
>>
>>One of fsp4net could be survivor
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>discuss mailing list
>>discuss at 1net.org
>>http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>discuss mailing list
>discuss at 1net.org
>http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss