I agree that the current draft language on this point appears too narrow. However, Malcolm's proposed language is overbroad and goes beyond what was agreed to. I can understand the desire of the drafters to avoid using the term "regulate," since ICANN is not a regulatory body and is thus incapable of regulating as such. The trick is capturing the conceptual essence of the term without using it, and without substituting terms of substantially broader or narrower effect. The essence of regulation is prescribing or imposing rules and/or requirements. As such, I find Bradley's suggested language to fall much closer to carrying out the intent of the CCWG Report, and I support that language as well: ICANN shall not impose terms and conditions on services that use the Internet’s unique identifiers or the content that such services carry or provide. I do not support the new note to the drafters that Malcolm has proposed as a "request." I don't think this objectively frames the issue, and I don't think it is necessary to include a pontificatory paragraph with our suggested language. I suggest we scuttle this, rather than taking the time to negotiate an acceptable version. All we need to say is that we believe the draft bylaws didn't adequately capture this particular point and we propose the language above as a replacement. Greg [image: http://hilweb1/images/signature.jpg] *Gregory S. Shatan | Partner*McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP 245 Park Avenue, 27th Floor | New York, New York 10167 T: 212-609-6873 F: 212-416-7613 gshatan @mccarter.com | www.mccarter.com BOSTON | HARTFORD | STAMFORD | NEW YORK | NEWARK EAST BRUNSWICK | PHILADELPHIA | WILMINGTON | WASHINGTON, DC On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am not sure that this discussion even belongs in the CCWG ACCT.
Can we perhaps move it to a later discussion? M
To: lists@christopherwilkinson.eu From: malcolm@linx.net Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 23:00:19 +0100 CC: accountability-cross-community@icann.org Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Implementation flaw in Mission section
On 08/04/2016 21:09, Christopher Wilkinson wrote:
Dear Malcolm:
This, as I think you know, goes too far and is politically
unsustainable.
Who, then is to regulate offending or illegal content or services in
TLDs with global scope?
Who, then is to enforce commitments reached prior to delegation of the domain?
Dear Christopher,
I think you know that this is properly a matter for governments, acting within their own jurisdiction according to national sovereignty, and that ICANN has no legitimacy to some supervening global authority in the regulation of Internet content or the businesses that use the Internet.
Kind Regards,
Malcolm. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
London Internet Exchange Ltd Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London EC3R 8AJ
Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
