Can you explain about why this brief in being filed with
ICANN?
It is a set of comments in a "careful" style.
If you look at the cover letter, you can see that other
actions are being requested such as establishing an open
public comment process on GAC (or any other significant
filings) to ICANN. This is in direct response of Esther
where we appeared together on the recent CSPR Conference
panel. She asserted that GAC was "just another committee."
To which my response was that if it was just another
committee, there should be some means either to participate
or to comment on GAC "findings."
Would you file a legal brief with other US nonprofit entities?
If they purported to have government and intergovernmental
powers, certainly.
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?
Plainly. This issue was raised last year by Larry
Lessig. Anyone even glancing at ICANN-GAC realized it
is a private corporation masquerading as a very regulatory
oriented government agency.
Is there some reason the brief wasn't filed with the US government?
ICANN was the lowest appropriate venue.
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?
Others raised this issue - i.e. whether the style doesn't
indirectly raise ICANN stature. I think not. The purpose
was simply to encourage a reply and comment process where
arguments and statements had some significant citations to
authority. This should be compared to the GAC's pronouncements
where Twoumey just waives his hand in the air and makes
statements.
--tony
