Olivier,

As you stated:
...you take the example of Rojadirecta having applied
successfully for top level domain Rojadirecta - and what you are saying
is that there could be a request through a US court for this top level
domain to be removed from the Root. Using your words, that would "take
down the web presence of the respective businesses" -- all of the domain
names under .rojadirecta would be affected. Well, you're right. Perhaps
that's why Rojadirecta prefers operating under a variety of top level
domains that are not run by a US Registry rather than running its own
Top Level Domain.
So it seems you agree with Parminder, that .rojadirecta's being forced to operate under U.S. jurisdiction necessarily results in their seeking alternatives. I read your position as, if I may paraphrase, "If they're not willing to abide by U.S. law they should take a hike." And Parminder is saying "this is unfair, U.S. rules should not be global." I lean toward Parminder.

But I'm not sure an engagement argument based on aiding a giant corporation will resonate with our members, who represent the interests of individual internet users. However, it seems obvious that no single nation's laws should rule the Internet. As such, it might be appropriate that an initiative for an equitable and stable global governance process for the root should begin here.

Best,

Tom
 

On 4/9/2016 3:57 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
Dear Thomas,

On 09/04/2016 20:51, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:

Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't Parminder's thought
bottom-up, and in-line with the multi-stakeholder concept? (And I see
some merit in his concerns about gTLD governance.) 

The Treaty Model which Parminder argues for requires signature from UN
Member States.
http://www.un.org/en/member-states/

Where is Civil Society?
Where are End Users?
Where are the Technical & Academic Communities?
Where is the Private Sector?

Kindest regards,

Olivier