| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
ICANN Publishes Letter from Gilmore to Cerf
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 10 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
ICANN is trying to show bias and influence. Gilmore is largely funding Auerbach's case. Gilmore has an agenda. ICANN would like to the court to believe that by accepting Gilmore's money, Auerbach is obligated to carry out Gilmore's hostile-toward-ICANN agenda. Therefore, ICANN will be detrimentally harmed by allowing Auerbach access to the records, and consequently empowering Auerbach to assist Gilmore.
The problem with this argument is that Gilmore's message to Cerf articulately sets forth the general problems with ICANN. It does not make threats, even impliedly; nor does it suggest Auerbach would use the documents to hurt ICANN. Rather, Gilmore implies that Auerbach would use the documents to improve ICANN.
I suppose Gilmore's statements about ICANN going down like Japan might cause a reaction, but the leap to Auerbach's alleged intended improprieties is too large.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Hi: We have what amounts to a perpetual monopoly being held by NSI?
We have what amounts to "benefits to certain parties with heavy ties to the U.S. Military"?
I guess this is worse than I imagined. Who has a pointer to a primer/history of ICANN to recommend? My greatest fear was, that ICANN would turn out to be the "gatekeeper" and no access to the Internet unless they "approved, certified, and registered" my machine, underwear, and socks. Looks like I may have been too naive.
Thanks, Tom
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
"ICANN does not give a damn about the fundamental rights of citizens or Internet users."
Correction:
It DOES, but only to those who belong to large corporations who can afford to register trademarks all over the place.
Some of the UDRP Panelists are clearly biased and repeatedly make decisions against ICANN's own rules and yet no one kicks them off the panel lists, or challenged them... Why not?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | 2 replies beneath your current threshold. |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
