<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] Court Oversight
- To: ga <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [ga] Court Oversight
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 16:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ltdtKRbJxOM8fRW8zmjQOfFC6y7+ZtLPgxfW47fjJlaCqRtcqVVDwfnI+DlqGfiarhHtiWiJsk2XQXzsTtkubU7d1mi7WHF0LSZbxocNULhcQ+MYfNgcbBUnDaPQhbFwIznStmSKgOeq1dT5KEWXvFduDrtfVGvTGKblNd6U54A= ;
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thank you all for your thoughtful responses. I think we can reach a consensus that while courts may rule on particular cases that it would be unwise for them to begin down the slippery slope of telling ICANN how it must do its' job.
I have yet to see a published opinion that indicated a courts' true grasp of what it takes and means to be the "governor" of the assignment of names and numbers in this venue. I think we are better off with bickering experts and politicians.
Eric
---------------------------------
All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|