You missed my point, though I suppose I made it somewhat opaque with irony. ICANN will listen to the FTC because it has to. Respond, I suppose, is correct also. ICANN doesn't really have to listen to the non-contracted parties in the multistakeholder environment, so it often doesn't. And it often doesn't bother to respond, either. At least as far as my ALAC experience goes. If it did, it could have saved us all a lot of time and effort in the new gTLD process. Because we said the things that are being said now by the FTC, by members of the US Congress, etc., four years ago. Repeatedly. In writing. -----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria <avri@ella.com> Sent: Dec 19, 2011 2:36 PM To: NARALO Discussion List <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FTC letter on new gTLDs
Hi,
Why is that a US FTC Commission must be listened to? Responded to, yes, but listened to, as in obey? Why?
What authority does they have over the ICANN multistakeholder process?
avri
On 19 Dec 2011, at 12:19, Beau Brendler wrote:
Just wanted to make sure everyone saw, and read, this letter on the new gTLD program sent by the FTC to ICANN on the 16th. It's a stinging letter and contains a number of elements that several of us have been saying for years. It also infers that ICANN is corrupted by contracted parties. For me -- I know you don't all share my views -- I feel somewhat vindicated that some entity that actually will have to be listened to, is finally saying these things:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/closings/publicltrs/111216letter-to-icann.pdf
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------