<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Casting stones
> international) structures that can also achieve substantial buy-in. I
> think that is do-able. But this is not the forum for that discussion.
Where is that forum?
Better design can happen in parallel to the execution of existing
instructions, but also remember that ad hoc solutions have a way of taking
root while the "better" protocol is being designed....
-rwr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@does-not-exist.org>
Cc: "Gary Osbourne" <gro@direct.ca>; <DannyYounger@cs.com>; <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Casting stones
> I think there are many other alternatives. I agree that simply expecting
> Congress to pull rabbits out of some hat and solve all these problems is
> not realistic. The challenge is to design better (and even more truly
> international) structures that can also achieve substantial buy-in. I
> think that is do-able. But this is not the forum for that discussion.
>
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2002, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> > On 2002-08-06 18:20:21 -0400, Michael Froomkin wrote:
> >
> > And what's your perspective for the future? Replacing ICANN? By
> > what? Direct government oversight over Verisign? How realistic is
> > that?
> >
> > All this talk about a re-bid, or about working around ICANN,
> > ultimately boils down to the suggestion to replace the lobbyist
> > battleground called ICANN by the lobbyist battleground called
> > Capitol Hill. Same players, different coast. How's that an
> > improvement?
> >
> > Bad enough, you don't seem to have any plans for the event that the
> > battleground remains at the West Coast. What's the NGO community
> > going to do when ICANN reform actually happens, and the DoC renews
> > the MoU? Still continue to lobby for a "re-bid", focus on the meta
> > level, and let Intellectual Property interests dominate part of the
> > debate down on the detail levels where policy and architecture (*)
> > are made? (Yes, I know that things are more complicated.)
> >
> > As I wrote you earlier today: The argument that people don't listen
> > is a hell of a lot more credible when you have said something. Not
> > in year 1, but now.
> >
> > (*) Used like Lessig does it. Think, for instance, about thick vs.
> > thin registry. Thick registry does, in particular, mean that you
> > can do some jurisdiction shopping as far as privacy of registrants
> > is concerned. That's much more difficult with a thin registry.
> >
>
> --
> **NOTE: 7/31-8/14 law.miami.edu will have random downtime due to
> "network upgrades". Mail will bounce, and www.law.tm will 404.**
>
> Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
> A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin@law.tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
> -->It's very hot here.<--
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|