That would have been the sensible thing to do; third party beneficiary rights. But for those that would matter, an aggrieved party needed first to convince ICANN that the commitment was breached. And then it is solely ICANN that had standing to determine what remedy to seek, if any. All this after you're invited to navigate all the squirelly 'opt outs' in some of them! On the balance of those facts, I determined they wouldn't be worth warm spit. Reminded me of what my grandmother told me about the perils of buying a sewing machine from England back in the 50's. You could get one without the belt or the gear, even the needle. Then when you inquired - via snail mail! - you get the response 'so very sorry, that <piece> was not a part of the bundle. You have to buy that separately'. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:
On 09/03/2014 03:36 PM, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
They form part of the contract and are enforceable...
Well maybe yes and maybe no.
Did ICANN ever put third party beneficiary rights into its contracts with registries and registrars?
If not then only the actual parties to the contract will have the power to march into court and demand enforcement of the contractual terms. Everyone else will lack "standing" and will only be able to watch from the sidelines and gnash teeth.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ 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