Re: [icann-eu] Does the ICANN legally exist (this is not a joke)?

[Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>]

Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> "ICANN being a no member corporation, does ICANN exist according the laws
> of your country and if not may a corporation of your country enter into
> legally valid relations with it?"

Errr... Jefsey,
it seems to me that it is only important whether ICANN
exists according to the laws of California (and the
United States). Your state shouldn't have to approve the 
inner workings of an Australian Pty. Ltd., a German e.G. 
or an Irish teoranta for you to do business with it --
as long as it is recognized by .au/.de/.ie domestic law. 
(I would presume there is an international agreement 
roughly equivalent to the Vienna CISG for goods. Lawyers?)

And it seems to me that it does not violate California
laws, as the CA Corporations Code explicitly provides for 
Non Profit Public Benefit Corporations without members
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=corp
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=corp&group=05001-06000&file=5310-5313

(For the record: There may of course be good reasons for
ICANN to become a corporation with members, my point is
that ICANN isn't illegal in California because of its
lack of members.)

From a quick glance at the Corporations Code it looks to
me as if only persons can become members, and the 
membership is non-transferable. This doesn't look 
favourable for a 'silent takeover' by the ccTLDs without
much ado; 

I'm sorry, but I think you are on the wrong track here,
and I also disagree with handing over ICANN to the ccTLDs
and gTLDs -- this does /not/ fully address the @large 
concerns.

Best regards,
/// Alexander