1+ to Vittorio. The issue of "jurisdiction" will come back soon. And all options will be on the table again. If Ethos & Co. will go to court, we will have the situation, that a Californian Court will claim that it has the final decision making power over ICANN. As Jonathan has argued in his CircleID article, this would trigger the re-opening of a discussion on "ICANN oversight". The IANA transition ended US government oversight over ICANN and gave all the oversight powers to the "empowered community". If now a Californian court tops the empowered community (regardless if the court decision is "yes" or "no"), governments will come back and asking the question, why the final word over the management of a global public ressouce is in the hands of a US based Californian Court. And the whole "multistakeholder model" and the concept of the "empowered community" will be questioned again.

In justifying its decision yesterday, the Board was wise enough to refer to the "30 letters of stakeholders". It did not mentioned explicitly the letter of the Californian GA. This sends a clear message to the broader public, that the Board sees its decision as an outcome of a broad based bottom up multistakehoder process and not as a "yes Sir" with a regard to one "big letter". But I am afraid that this is not the end of the story. Probably this is the start of a new beginning. 

Wolfgang

 
Vittorio Bertola via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> hat am 1. Mai 2020 um 08:20 geschrieben:

Il 2020-05-01 05:05 Evan Leibovitch ha scritto:

https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-board-withholds-consent-for-a-change-of-control-of-the-public-interest-registry-pir

I think ICANN did the less bad thing it could do, and in the overall this is the best choice for all of us who own a .org.
At the same time, this really casts shadows over the credibility of the IANA Transition, and ICANN will have to think at how to better insulate itself from any direct governmental control. Starting from twenty years ago, a range of solutions has been proposed, from moving to classic neutral countries (e.g. Switzerland) to establishing a U.N.-style host country agreement with the U.S. I'm sure that many countries will raise this issue again.
Ciao,
-- 
vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
-------->        now blogging & more at http://bertola.eu/   <--------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.