[ga] Re: Role of US Government

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Patrick,

Saturday, March 17, 2001, 11:13:55 PM, Patrick Corliss wrote:

> On Sunday, March 18, 2001 5:02 PM (AEST)
> William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com> wrote:
>> Saturday, March 17, 2001, 8:48:20 PM, Dassa wrote:
>> > There are always ways around such things.  Nor do I hold with the
>> > Internet infrastructure being bound by US law.
>>
>> Actually it MUST be bound by US law, simply because of the history and
>> our laws.  The role the USG has played and our laws that govern those
>> issues, must be the driving factors.  ICANN it bound by those simply
>> because it is a US based corporation, and the contracts that give it
>> what "power" it has are with the US Government.

> Hi William

> On the one hand you are arguing in favour of a single root under ICANN control
> and on the other hand you are arguing in favour of competitive market forces
> which allow New.Net to set up a competing root.

No, you are misstating my positions.

What I AM saying is that ICANN, whether we like it or not, is going to
be regulated by US Law and by the US Government.

That is a simple fact.

> (1)    If there is a single monopolistic root this would be at risk of breaking
> US anti-trust laws.  Certainly that's an argument that has been made.

> (2)    There is nothing to stop a person in another country, such as Australia,
> setting up another competing root which is not subject to USG laws except as it
> relates to internet use within its jurisdiction.

But that would not be relevant in this forum, since this forum is
dealing exclusive with matters under ICANN's area of control.


-- 
Best regards,
 William                            mailto:william@userfriendly.com


--
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