Re: [ga] Auerbach vs. ICANN update

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Don and all assembly members,

Don Brown wrote:

> The response from the defense counsel is to be expected. Even rapists
> and murderers are entitled to a zealous legal defense under the US
> form of government.

  Exactly right here..

>
>
> Although we may find that either the plaintiff's counsel or the
> defense' counsel are creative, that's to be expected, too. Both
> opposing law firms are just doing their jobs. We don't have to like
> it, but that's just the way it is.

  Also true...

>
>
> Personally, I'm on Karl's side.

  As am I and nearly every single one of our members..

>
>
> I'm not a lawyer, but even if I was, suffice it to say that it will
> either be the opposing counsels who work out a settlement or the
> courts which adjudicate a resolution.  We may not like it either, but
> we will never know all of the facts and what led up to the settlement
> or resolution, either.

  Unfortunately I agree with your conclusion here as well.

>
>
> Face it.  Sometimes, the bad guys, in our eyes, win.

Yes sadly this is true.

> Although,
> because we don't know all the fact and because we are not lawyers, our
> eyes may not be 20-20, either.

  But our opinions always are 20-20.  >;)  And regardless of how this
case comes out, THAT public opinion will extract a price and/or
extract a ongoing price despite the any facts.  The court of public
opinion is often more compelling than any court decision.

>
>
> This will shake out on its own and any noise we make about it on this
> list will not serve any good purpose, in the final analysis.

  Here is where I and our members disagree.  If perhaps enough pressure
from public opinion is brought to bare, it may influence the outcome
of this case or such public opinion will impact ICANN and it's
current BoD and staff members in some way, either negatively or
positively and likely in a significant way as well...  So open
discussion on this matter is both in the best interest of the ICANN
BoD and staff and the stakeholders to some extent.

>
>
> We're on the sidelines.

Yes we are.  But we are all indirectly involved and the outcome of this
case may well impact each and every stakeholder/user.

> I'm pulling for Karl, because I think he was
> right in what he did -- provided his plaintiff's counsel wasn't too
> creative with the petition.  Time will tell.

  Agreed here.

>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Friday, April 19, 2002, 7:24:42 PM, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@digitel.net> wrote:
> KS> it would seem to me that maybe your pointing the finger in the wrong
> KS> direction here Jamie.  We might also question whether the suit was frivolous
> KS> to begin with.
>
> KS> you accomplish very little by trying  to personalize this litigation..
> KS> (unless your just trying to keep the pot at a boil...)
>
> KS> also... your selective generalizations tend to reflect a bit of a bias here
> KS> jamie..
>
> KS> ken
>
> KS> ----- Original Message -----
> KS> From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>
> KS> To: <sandy@storm.ca>
> KS> Cc: <ga@dnso.org>
> KS> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 6:47 PM
> KS> Subject: Re: [ga] Auerbach vs. ICANN update
>
> >> Maybe we should ask how much the lawusuit will end up costing ICANN...
> >> seems like the ICANN management doesn't like Karl very much, and is going
> >> to spend a lot of money on this seemingly pointless lawsuit.   I can't
> >> imagine anything that ICANN couldn't show its board members....The
> KS> salaries
> >> aren't secret are they?    Jamie
> >>
> >>
> >> > Ken Stubbs wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> hello sandy ..
> >> >>
> >> >> many your inquiries can be answered by reading the
> >> >> legal briefs prepared by both sides.
> >> >
> >> > I see nothing in either brief that answers my question.
> >> >
> >> >> > Can someone please tell me exactly what ICANN
> >> >> > management are protecting here? What parts of
> >> >> > ICANN financial records are confidential and
> >> >> > why?
> >> > --
> >> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> >> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> >> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> >> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> James Love
> >> http://www.cptech.org mailto:james.love@cptech.org
> >> mobile +1.202.361.3040
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> >> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> >> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> >> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >>
>
> KS> --
> KS> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> KS> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> KS> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> KS> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> ----
> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
> donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
> PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
> Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> ----
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html