I like this suggestion.  However, I would want to be sure that community is understood.  We're not all on our lonesome in a Hobbesian world.  (I know that isnt the intent, nor a necessary reading.)   i.e.,  "General Public" is more than just an aggregation of Individuals.

Also:  What will "expressly enforceable" look like?

On 3/22/07, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com > wrote:
While we're thinking of third-party beneficiaries in the ICANN
accreditation agreements, I'd also suggest it for the RALO MOUs being signed.

Suggested language: "Third-Party Beneficiaries.  This agreement is
made for the benefit of the general public.  Individual Internet
users are its intended beneficiaries, and its terms are expressly
enforceable by any member of the public [in this region]."

--Wendy

--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/


_______________________________________________
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
---
Draft MoU with ICANN:
http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU

Draft Operating Principles:
http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter
Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance
Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition
President, Association For Community Networking

Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance:  http://www.digitalaccessalliance.org