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.ica... --- 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