RE: [wg-c] registry contracts

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

So it is your position that ICANN is more than just a "technical coordination"
organization, as their MoU with the DOC states that they are?

ICANN keeps denying they are anything more than that, but I also don't see how
economic models come under technical coordination.  Of course, neither does uniform
dispute policies.

Of course, we all knew this all along, despite the MoU and Esther's constant
denials, that ICANN is indeed about Internet Governance, but they are loath to admit
it.

Nice to see someone like Marilyn willing to stand up and admit it.

On 14-Nov-99 Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
> 
> Actually, I think that the issue of for profit vs. non profit does lie
> within ICANN's scope of authority, Chris.  Or at least the parameters of
> behavior lie within their authority. Marilyn Cade
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Ambler [mailto:cambler@iodesign.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 1999 4:14 PM
> To: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] registry contracts
> 
> 
>> Why are we even bothering to discuss the business models of 
>> independent corporations?  If ICANN is for "technical management" and 
>> not "Internet governance" wouldn't that mean that a corporation's 
>> business model is far outside the scope of ICANN to control or even 
>> to suggest?  Should we not instead be focused on the technical 
>> considerations and qualifications ONLY?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Christopher

--
William X. Walsh - DSo Internet Services
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934