Re: [IFWP] Re: Thoughts on ICANN

[Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law]

Craig McTaggart asks whether it's unfair for people to accuse ICANN of
lacking public virtues when this is a feature rather than a bug in a
private body.

The danger, it seems to me, is having the worst of both worlds.  Public
and private have different accountability modes.  To oversimplify a lot,
one is ballots,the other is market.  ICANN has little to no of either.
This doesn't prove that ICANN will do anything bad, just as accountability
doesn't always prevent organizations from doing bad things.

But it's a worry.

Organizations have a tendency to expand.  It's almost a bureaucratic
imperative.  A body with no check on its access to funds is particularly
vulnerable to this tendency.

It's a worry.

For me the relevant continuum is no public-private.  That's almost as
unhelpful as ICANN v. NSI.  The relevant dichotomies are accountable/free
and clearly-bounded-limited-task/generalizable-mandate-subject-to-
revision.

It's a worry.

Then there's the issue of who chooses the deciders....

-- 
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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 hot here.   <--