[Ec-ncuc] letter to the Board regarding the IOC/Red cross protection - URGENT

[Nuno Garcia]

Hi all.

Maybe something should also be said regarding the precedent that is being
inaugurated with this case. A precedent that allows a few to have
preferential treatment despite of the merits or lack of merits these few
may have, a finally, the precedent on the process itself. Having approved
this, the board may legitimately be asked to proceed in similar manner
regarding other issues, i.e., by waving and disconsidering the comments and
objections that were presented.

This may be one of two things: there is a lot of pression from several
stakeholders to further control the Internet and "en passant", ICANN. This
may be the proof that everyone needs that ICANN in unable to support and
honor the commitements and the rules of procedures that it is supposed to
implement, allowing for a lawful dismission of ICANN contract. Or, it may
be a manner of ICANN to prove that despite some wrong actions from its
constituencies, it is still capable of enforcing such transparent rules.

Sorry if my english is too irregular, I'll try harder next time.

BR
Nuno Garcia

On 29 March 2012 18:04, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Hmmm, when I read KK's msg below I guessed we were been too lame to just
> express concern, but then I read the doc and it goes far beyond that,
> and I fully endorse it.
>
> What is going on with this GNSO? They jeopardize the entire process with
> this amazing exception, affecting the dominant constituencies (business)
> as well, and even so they go for this absurd approval.
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 03/29/2012 11:28 AM, Konstantinos Komaitis wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As you know the motion regarding the ?special? protections requested by
> the IOC and the Red Cross passed on Monday at the ?emergency? GNSO meeting.
> I think that it would be a great idea to send a letter to the Board
> expressing our concerns on the procedural deficiencies of this whole
> process, mainly with the fact that the public comments period was not
> respected and was not dealt appropriately.
> >
> > I am asking whether you agree with the content of this letter so I can
> send it to the Board.
> >
> > Apologies to be putting pressure on you, but can you please let me know
> by the end of business day tomorrow? If I don?t hear an objection I will
> consider that none exists!
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > KK
> >
> > Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,
> >
> > Senior Lecturer,
> > Director of Postgraduate Instructional Courses
> > Director of LLM Information Technology and Telecommunications Law
> > University of Strathclyde,
> > The Law School,
> > Graham Hills building,
> > 50 George Street, Glasgow G1 1BA
> > UK
> > tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
> >
> http://www.routledgemedia.com/books/The-Current-State-of-Domain-Name-Regulation-isbn9780415477765
> > Selected publications:
> http://hq.ssrn.com/submissions/MyPapers.cfm?partid=501038
> > Website: www.komaitis.org<http://www.komaitis.org>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ec-ncuc mailing list
> > Ec-ncuc at ipjustice.org
> > http://mailman.ctyme.com/listinfo/ec-ncuc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ec-ncuc mailing list
> Ec-ncuc at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ctyme.com/listinfo/ec-ncuc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ec-ncuc/attachments/20120329/8da5f600/attachment-0001.html>