[discuss] shifts in IANA/accountability discussion: your thoughts?

Mike Roberts mmr at darwin.ptvy.ca.us
Thu Jun 19 19:20:04 UTC 2014

I am not averse to the several fine thoughts provided earlier in this thread, despite the fact that mostly they are reaching for something that sounds like “new world order” stuff.

The most obvious remedy for an ICANN violation of its bylaws or the public benefit corporation statute in California is a suit to compel corrective action.

It has been used before successfully.  

Let’s not let latent anti-American emotions, or hopes for a grand global compromise,  make the perfect an enemy of the good.

- Mike

On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:43 AM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:

> I believe that any suggestion that the IANA function should be
> transferred to any organization other than ICANN is largely a paper
> tiger.
> What other organization? A new organization? etc. The suggestions make
> little practical sense.
> That said, as you point out, the next important issue is how
> accountability can be implemented which is not just a paper tiger.
> In reality NTIA was mostly a paper tiger at least in their contractual
> function. Of course as an arm of the US govt if they were sufficiently
> motivated they could swing other mechanisms into play, perhaps
> including drone strikes.
> NTIA delayed approval once but it was not evident what alternative
> they were seriously pursuing. It was largely symbolic to my
> understanding.
> Nonetheless there is a need for if not worst-case then bad-case
> accountabilty. Worst-case (e.g., blatant corruption) tends to have
> remedy by legal action.
> Which seems to beg for extra-ICANN accountability with requirements
> for ICANN's full participation and commitment.
> But what would the remedies be?
> For example, some major flaw in following by-laws etc followed by a
> resistance to correct. What is the process for review and findins?
> What is the remedy when merited?
> The biggest danger is, as I allude to in the first part of this note,
> that merely threatening to terminate the "contract" (function) with
> ICANN may not be an effective remedy since as things stand it would
> not be clear who else would pick up that function so, again, likely
> just a paper tiger.
> -- 
>        -Barry Shein
> The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
> Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

More information about the discuss mailing list