On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 11:44:51AM -0400, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
>
> If the names council was 80% ORSC people I'd scream saying it was unbalanced
> and nobody would take it seriously. The bylaws, as implemented, fail to
> prevent capture by a single organzation.
The bylaws, no matter what they say, or how they are implemented,
can't ever prevent capture. First of all, as a practical matter you
can't really ever write a description of an organization like ORSC
that would be both legally defensible, and describe all the
"members". I'm a member of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science...
Second of all, and more important -- the board can modify the bylaws.
The board could dissolve the corporation and transfer its assets to
another corporation. The bylaws are easily mutable, and they are
*not* a constitution, no matter what the "internet governance"
hecklers keep saying.
Even if the bylaws could be considered a constitution, they would
remain in large part irrelevant. The real issue is the powers of the
corporation as a whole, not the powers of the directors or the
membership or the SOs.
That's why all the furor over the structure of the corporation is
largely a fools game (*). Of course, the structure has *some*
importance. But it is secondary. The real controls over ICANN come
from governments, laws (in particular anti-trust laws) and the nature
of the agreements ICANN can convince other entities to sign.
(*) except for NSI, of course -- any delay is to its benefit.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
