-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Carlton Samuels wrote:

To use an "Evanism", let me see if I get this straight. :-)

It identifies the reason for the "repeated injuries and usurpations" experienced by registrants; the lack of contract enforcement by ICANN and the disability/disinclination of some registrants to access remedies via the UDRP.

I would add to "disability/disinclination of registrants", the lack of easy to access information to registrants detailing any recourse they may have.

There is no acknowledgement that contracts between parties are well dissected in the tort law with remedies available in law and equity.

So what is the ALAC recommending here? An issues report, the sum total of which cannot be more than to tell ICANN it went to sleep on its own contract enforcement!

Do we even need an issues report to enable ALAC to assert this position to the Board? I thought that one of the great things about ALAC (often touted as a reason At-Large doesn't get a seat on the Board) is that we have the ability to advocate user issues and concerns directly to the Board. We should be getting the Board to direct their own resources to confirm the problem (if that is even necessary) and then to itself act. Issues reports appear to be SO mechanisms to which ALAC is not bound. Can we not be more creative -- or at least more direct -- on this issue? - - Evan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFI9jFHB6WWYxnsgmwRAn8WAJ9OqveDESn/ZkE7DRDwNug6XA/i5ACfUDq/ nKEDSg+Bk35kdlGtIIGnZ6U= =Uef0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----