Dear Kaili,
To keep the definition as narrow as possible, I see the "need" for regulation "in the public interest" only when there is conflict of interest between the public good/service provider (Rr/Ry) and the user (Registrant).
There might be another good list of reasons for regulation, but in this case, and to make progress in the discussion Carlton proposed, would like to suggest to stick to a narrow and relevant definition of regulation and public interest.
Happy to dicsuss any improvement to a narrow definition of public interest in our case, and avoid Fadi's failure in finding a general one. (RIP)
El 2018-07-14 09:48, Kan Kaili escribió:
Hi, Julf,
You have raised a very interesting question. However, according to the attached article of mine, the "public interest" is exactly the consumers/end-users' interest, which is to be represented by At-Large. That is, as long as the govermental regulator is fairly elected by the public.
Kaili
----- Original Message -----
From: "Johan Helsingius" <julf@julf.com>
To: "ICANN At-Large list" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2018 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: [At-Large] [lac-discuss-en] Vistaprint is abandoning .vista
On 14-07-18 08:23, Kan Kaili wrote:
● Such a refocus demands redefining the global public interest as the
initiator and driver of
ICANN policy rather than its current status of reactive adviso
But who defines "global public interest"? Unfortunately the standard
answer tends to be "governments/UN/ITU".
Julf
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org