Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: Recordings of Amsterdam Meetings and PROPOSAL

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 10:13 p.m. 23/12/2002, Esther Dyson wrote:
> SOrry, but  I think this misses the point.
>
> ICANN is not "the board" or even the staff.  ICANN is all the Internet 
> participants (registries, registrars, root servers) who have contracts 
> with ICANN, overseen by the board.
ICANN  is  a Corporation. What you are describing above is much more: a 
Corporatist state, with authority "overseen by the Board" enforced through 
contracts.

No wonder ICANN does not perceive the need for representation of Individual 
Domain Name Holders on its Board: they are already bound (eh, represented) 
by contracts with registrars.

>  At least in principle and mostly in practice, they have to agree to 
> its  policies.  If you want to have influence, you have to *part* of that 
> structure....and have a contract or at least an MOU with ICANN too.
The ccTLD's will be hearing this with great interest. :-(

 Happy holidays to you all.


-joop-


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de