Re: [At-Large] Chiba response to FNOI
Joly, Thanks for sending the link. The MSWord file shows editorial changes, word choice, and nuances, which is interesting. I am not a lawyer, and in particular, I am not a lawyer with a practice in administrative law and with specialialization in the DoC and NTIA as agencies, but I suspect that when each of the following three parties -- the DoC/NTIA, ICANN, and ISOC China -- use the phrase "multi-stakeholder", they mean very distinct things. I think the DoC/NTIA usage means "mumble, within the context of Notice and Comment requirements of the (Federal) Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, for (delegated) rule making by federal agencies" I'm fairly certain the ICANN usage means something involving "transparency and accountability" and the bylaws entities, and a no-cost contract to which it claims the US is not a beneficiary, as those elements were in the prior ICANN NTIA NOI concerning the IANA Functions. I think, based only upon conversations with a senior offical in China a decade ago, that the ISOC China usage means something involving sovereigns in addition to the United States, and possibly bylaws entities. Again, with the IANAL caveat, I don't see how the contract between the California 501(c)(3) and the USG can easily accomodate equal enforcement rights by third parties. Eric
Hello Eric, On 28/07/2011 16:11, ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net wrote :
I think, based only upon conversations with a senior offical in China a decade ago, that the ISOC China usage means something involving sovereigns in addition to the United States, and possibly bylaws entities.
You are correct in your reply, but it is not ISOC China. ISOC has no chapter in China and the Internet Society of China is not affiliated with ISOC. Web site on: http://www.isc.org.cn/isc_eIntroduction/index.htm Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
participants (2)
-
ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond