> build up a *practice
> > of mutual defense/ recognition/ security/ communication/
> > enforcement/ commerce.
>
> Exactly right. And this is what we have now with what are
> commonly called Laws. But, there are those amongst the ICANNites
> that feel these laws are not adequate and need "Special"
> assistance. That assistance known now as ADR's, although extralegal
> and beyond the financial reach of most small Internet business
> folks. But no matter, they are useful for the large business
> concerns in helping to maintain their monopolist tendencies.
Not quite. What we have now is a structure which has been
'organizationalized' for so long and so effectively that where Law
comes from -- how its made -- has been forgotten, as if the
reasoning is that if there are no fundamentals, then it doesnt matter
who makes Law. If our nominal buyers and sellers are happy to
work under an invisible frame of enforcement, should the enforcers
(be they DoC functionaries, non-profit board members or the all-
seeing EyeBM) rock their boat? What, help *them realize that they
themselves are being daily bought and sold? That their
'transactions' are to Commerce as IFWP discussions are to
Governance? No way, Josef -- look at the flap when Yahoo went
and made legally clear what 'privacy' meant!
kerry
