Roeland M.J. Meyer a écrit:
> As you may already surmise. Mr. Sondow makes a rather bad habit of
> stereotypical castigation. It is the nature of the beast, I'm afraid.
While there may be some few people who get through the hell of law school on
their burning passion to do good for their fellow man, the overwhelming
majority are spurred on by the lust for money. Likewise, there may be some
few lawyers who have been drawn to these Internet squabbles for the
opportunities, rather slim, they offer to do good for the Internet, but I
don't think I'm too far off the mark when I suggest that this vociferous
gabble of attorneys hovering over the Internet recently is come to pick it
for what it's worth.
As I've said before, the lawyer's creed is like Mickey Spillane's: "Trouble
is my business." Lawyers don't profit from agreements, consensus, and
pacific meeting of parties determined on compromise. They come into their
own when there is trouble too difficult to resolve by the method of normal
human discourse. Common fellowship, conversation, and compromise being
anathema to their profession and not a part of their system of beliefs, they
invariably do their utmost to set up a priori systems of guaranteed
belligerance, with all the trappings of third-party arbitration (requiring
lawyers), contractual arrangements (requiring lawyers), incorporation
(requiring lawyers), legislation (requiring lawyers), et cetera, et cetera.
Well, some of this may be necessary. We live in a world of litigation. But
it's not a very good idea to build in confrontation where it's not already
occurred. Nevertheless, this is precisely what's been done vis-a-vis ICANN
and the SOs, for example. How can the Internet be better off with the
experts on the DNS, Internet protocols, and addresses being removed from the
ICANN membership and Board? This defies common sense, although not the
uncommon sense of the attorneys, whose profits grow as more and more parties
are separated into opposed factions. Not content with this first success,
the attorneys will now approach the various parties - the constituencies of
the DNSO, for instance - with an eye to "incorporating " them, or at least
helping them to create some independent organizations that can be
represented by attorneys when they clash, which they will do, since they
will be set up for that.
In the end, we will all be alone, removed from each other and the
organizations we had hoped to form, which will exist on paper only. That is,
we will be alone with our respective attorneys, planning strategy for
defending ourselves from everyone else. The dream of a NewCo to unite
everyone becomes a lawyers' paradise.
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
