| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Why Did ICANN Do It?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 24 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
|
Perhaps California has a whistleblower law. If not, this may be a good example for why it should. But I also have a question for Michael or other legal minds. Once Karl leaves office, is he not then free (or at least freer) to disclose what he knows? He no longer has any fiduciary responsibility. I mean it's not like he can still be some kind of member because there ain't no such thing. Hmmm, mebbe they better extend his term. Declan McCullagh's Politech list has some coverage, including a
link to the ruling in HTML format. I hope the Cavebear sleeps well tonight, he's earned it, and I don't envy him the work ahead. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re: Why Did ICANN Do It?
by fnord
|
|
|
|
|
|
But I also have a question for Michael or other legal minds. Once Karl leaves office, is he not then free (or at least freer) to disclose what he knows? He no longer has any fiduciary responsibility.
He does. Besides, the court order, once formalized and entered (we still have to draft the formal order), including the provision that he must give ICANN 10 days notice before disclosing confidential documents, will be binding on him personally, not just in his capacity as an ICANN Director.
-J, one of Karl's attorneys
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
From the above link to the HTML version of the ruling:Furthermore, Lynn's 10/5/01 letter violates both section 6334 and Bylaws Article V, Section 21 because it deprives Auerbach of the inspection rights he has under law and imposes such unreasonable requirements as having to sign a confidentiality agreement and having to pursue burdensome review in any effort to enforce his inspection rights. Doesn't Lynn also have a duty not to deprive a Director of his legal rights, and responsibilities, to do his fiduciary duty? Who hired this guy? I mean really. I never have found out who was on a search or hiring committee. Lynn was brought in as a short term fallguy to front for crap like this and the ICANN Reform movement. He takes most of the heat but he's leaving. The rest, and worst, of the rot remains. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
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
|
