Re: [ga] ICANN's Game of Chicken with the USG

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny Younger wrote:
> The Progress and Freedom Foundation has called for a new GAO study of ICANN:
>
> http://blog.pff.org/archives/2009/01/icanns_game_of.html
That would be the third one - but to be precise, they were studies of 
the US Gov't agencies involved with ICANN, not of ICANN, the California 
non-profit/public-benefit corporation.
The first two GAO studies could not find a clear source of authority for 
NTIA or other parts of the Dept of Commerce to do what they were doing.
(In my lawsuit against ICANN for withholding its financial records from 
a sitting member of its Board of Directors, part of my evidence was an 
official copy of one of the GAO reports.  It had blue ribbons and 
embossed seals and everything; everyone, on both sides of the case, and 
the judge, thought that it was pretty cool.)
Remember Sally Rand - she danced around naked and hid (most of the time) 
behind some artful maneuvers with a pair of large feathered fans.  ICANN 
and NTIA have been doing something similar by fending off anti-trust 
questions by playing a now-you-see-it, now-you-don't game in which it is 
never clear whether ICANN is an independent private corporation or an 
arm of the US government.
Given NTIA's recent to letter to ICANN about ICANN's obligations to be 
concerned about creating concentrations of market power through its new 
TLD policies, one has to wonder how much longer ICANN can continue to 
avoid a well focused lawsuit that accuses ICANN of being an unlawful 
combination in restraint of trade.  So far that issue has not been 
clearly, unequivocally, and inescapably raised by one whose lawful 
business has been denied entry into the domain name marketplace by 
virtue of an ICANN denial or ICANN's fee structures.
                --karl--