Re: [ga] Re: ICANN before the US Senate...

[Eric Dierker <eric@xxxxxxxxxx>]

There is a wonderful point in time when really important issues get visited.
Sometimes it is personal - like when you visit your parents or your children 
in college; Often it is a larger global issue like governance and 
responsibiity.

Open and transparency is a given, and we suffer from the lack thereof.

Privacy and rights thereto are a constant battle, however privacy in the 
matters of public rights is tantamount to hell. Our ICANN staff is creating 
such a hell.

Congress or the EU or China are not yet designed for governance over the IT.
It is unrealistic to think that us pollywogs can keep up with the techies in 
this area.  It took almost five years to get down to enlightened court 
decisions on trademarks on the net. Believe me you have to take US District 
court judges in the back room and spank them mightely to explain what an @ 
means.

ICANN is a wonderful example of failure.  They are years behind the times, 
they are a dog led by it's tail, and they are not a non-profit.

ICANN has failed in every regard to live up to promises made to the world 
public in regard to it's foundation and operation.  No one can show one 
piece of current paper reflectin ICANNs legal operational ability as 
required by BTAs and DoC and IRS. The state of California will soon suspend 
them.

Eric



> On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 15:57, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> <snip>
>> I know it, you know it, we all know it.  But we have to look to the
>> legal realities to figure out what things can be used as levers and
>> which can not.  It will cost time and money to pull those levers - and
>> I don't see a lot of ICANN-critical folks out there wandering the
>> hallways in DC or visiting their congress critters to express their
>> disgust at ICANN's ways.   I see quite the contrary - those who have
>> found ICANN to be a boon to their businesses are quite active and use
>> highly skilled (and frequently quite honorable and personable) people
>> to maintain close contact in DC with administrative and legislative
>> staffs and principals.
>> 
>> 		--karl--
> 
> And isn't this the way of many things in DC?  The interests of those
> with the money in hand is always before the interests of those who
> COULD make money.  It's not about right or wrong; it's not even about
> the law.  It's about who has the megaphone and who has the right
> posturing - both of which take money.
> 
> Gene...