>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 22:34:49 -0500 (EST)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 1 22:34:48 1999
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.0.213])
> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6148EF0CF
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 22:34:48 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from panix7.panix.com (panix7.panix.com [166.84.0.232])
> by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
> id 3E2CE1553C; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 22:23:27 -0500 (EST)
>Received: (from ronda@localhost) by panix7.panix.com (8.8.8/8.7.1/PanixN1.0) id
>WAA27700; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 22:23:27 -0500 (EST)
>Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 22:23:27 -0500 (EST)
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: questioning significance of filing briefs with ICANN?
>
>
>>Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:20:08 -0400
>>From: "A.M. Rutkowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: [IFWP] Internet Rights Coalition Press Release
>
>>INTERNET RIGHTS COALITION FILES LEGAL BRIEF WITH ICANN
>>ON GOVERNMENT SOVEREIGNTY CLAIMS TO DOMAIN NAMES,
>>REQUESTS OPEN PROCESS
>
>(...)
>
>>http://www.wia.org/icann/irc_cover-letter.htm
>>http://www.wia.org/icann/irc_gac_brief.htm
>
>Can you explain about why this brief in being filed with
>ICANN?
>
>I am interested in how entities other than government entities
>become those with whom someone might file a legal brief?
>
>Would you file a legal brief with other US nonprofit entities?
>
>I thought that nonprofit entities were corporations of a form,
>not that they were legal bodies that governed or were endowed
>with government powers.
>
>However the filing a brief with a nonprofit entity seems to
>give the impression that it is endowed with the powers of
>a government. Do you feel it is?
>
>Is there some reason the brief wasn't filed with the US government?
>
>Under any conditions ICANN is only an entity that is supposed to
>be a design and test contract with the U.S. government. So I don't
>understand the brief going to ICANN and expecting ICANN to make
>decisions, especially where the Government Advisory Council,
>(GAC) which is the subject of the brief, has to do with government.
>
>The US government set up the GAC and it would seem that
>questions concerning the nature of the GAC have to do with
>the US government activity involving it.
>
>I wondered about the rationale behind filing a legal brief
>with ICANN? What do you see ICANN as that you treat them
>in a way that government's are treated?
>
>Are they a government entity in your mind?
>
>Thanks for any clarification on this.
>
>Ronda
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Netizens: On the History and Impact
> of Usenet and the Internet
> http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook
> also in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I see you've got yout fist out. Say your peace and get out. Guess
I get the gist of it, but... it's alright. Sorry that you feel that
way. The only thing there is to say is to say: ever silver lining
has a touch of grey" - JG.
