Re: [ga] Who can't be an icann registrar?

[Konrad Brandt <konrad_brandt@xxxxxxxxx>]

>"Would it be wise for ICANN to increase that risk by denying someone a 
livelihood because that person does not pass ICANN's private standards 
of conduct?"

Well yuh!  let them find a livelihood somewhere else.

>"it is probably not wise for us to want to vest even further authority into ICANN."

The reality is that icann already has an application process for registrars.  Basic requirements exist such as insurance, working capital and understanding of icann policies.  No one can become a registrar without completing this process.  Failure to satisfy certain requirements are ALREADY grounds for denying accreditation. 

like it or not, the public expects icann to do something when existing registrars become bad actors.

more importantly, like it or not, the public expects icann to be proactive in preventing bad actors from becoming registry/registrar owners in the first place.  

>"Were ICANN a properly empowered, properly chartered, and properly overseen governmental body, operating under well defined and practiced
rules of transparency, openness, and accountability, and with a mandated requirement to listen to the public and honor those concerns then yes,
ICANN could then, perhaps with relative safety, go into the kind of background histories."

Agreed.  This is certainly icann's stated goal and mission.  So, they should be acting accordingly to fulfill this mission.

Konrad Brandt



Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Konrad Brandt wrote:

> Can someone who has been banned for life by the US Federal Trade 
> Commission own and operate an icann registrar?

Unless there is a US Federal law that imposes the decisions of the FTC 
onto nominally private bodies, such as ICANN, then the FTC's decision 
has no effect on ICANN.

Moreover, in the US, corporations are considered legal people - two 
different corporations are usually considered separate even if they have 
the same shareholders.  This same kind of legal fiction about 
corporations tends to exist in many, perhaps most, countries.

So in answer to your question - Even people who have done bad things can 
become ICANN registrars.

> Doesn't icann perform a background check on new registrars?

This is actually a much broader question.

Should ICANN be a consumer protection agency?

Or should ICANN simply be a gatekeeper to ensure that registries and 
registrars adhere to minimal compliance with *technical* mandates 
necessary to preserve the *technical* stability while leaving compliance 
to the requirements of law to the law creation and law enforcement 
mechanisms of the various countries?

Indeed, ICANN is already at risk as a combination in restraint of trade. 
  Would it be wise for ICANN to increase that risk by denying someone a 
livelihood because that person does not pass ICANN's private standards 
of conduct?  Some may be tempted to take the road of vigilantism, 
history has taught us that it is a dangerous road.

Were ICANN a properly empowered, properly chartered, and properly 
overseen governmental body, operating under well defined and practiced 
rules of transparency, openness, and accountability, and with a mandated 
requirement to listen to the public and honor those concerns then yes, 
ICANN could then, perhaps with relative safety, go into the kind of 
background histories.

But absent that kind of structure, and we know that ICANN is far from 
that structure, it is probably not wise for us to want to vest even 
further authority into ICANN.

  --karl--




       
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally,  mobile search that gives answers, not web links.