The Weinstein appeal will give a strong indicator on whether the rights to .MIL and .GOV are a form of property. What must be really worrying from the right-wing in the USA is that (unless I'm mistaken) there's no carve out from ICANN (claimed) authority over .MIL/GOV as being any different from .COM/NET It's just that ICANN's left the legacy gTLDs alone these last 15 years. But a different ICANN, in a different juridsiction might, er, think differently. On 27/05/16 18:07, Dr Eberhard W Lisse wrote:
So,
that means nobody has ANY idea of it chanes of this going through, and the issue or property remains unsettled.
Neve rmind that the level of ignorance displayed is staggering (the reference to RFC1591).nd .
greetings, el
On 2016-05-27 17:51 , Phil Corwin wrote:
The chances of this bill becoming law are close to zero, unless it is attached to a larger "must pass" bill or added as a rider to an appropriations measure.
I'm not sure that the concept of "ownership" is a good fit for a TLD, but that language could always be modified to something along the lines of "permanent control".
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal [...] -----Original Message----- From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of avri doria Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:28 PM To: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] New Bill on IANA Transition
Hi,
Two questions:
- what are the chances that this becomes law
- doesn't RFC1591 already take care of this?
avri [...]