Tony:
If NSI can use its business model to build the same value for others as
it has done for itself, why the necessary opposition to GAC? They'd do
better to cooperate when the admission policy is sorted out. However,
your point that the laisser-faire governments who by their absence
outnumber those present could probably argue that the GAC has not a
sufficient quorum to make decisions. You would think they would want to
include people and make it very boring to gain total legitimacy, perhaps
some kind of equivalence with the coverage of the ccTLDs. What percentage
of governments need representation for their decisions to have effect
that GAC's recommendations be forwarded to ICANN as constituted by a
consensus of approriate sovereign opinion? Maybe it's in the bylaws?
A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> The more interesting issue and question is whether Twomey
> will act as a global cats paw for the sponsoring minister
> behind all this - who is also Twomey's mentor and sponsor.
>
> The GAC's purpose is to make findings on the legal obligations
> of ICANN - which is effectively obligated to honor those findings.
> One wonders how long it will take GAC to recommend that all DNS
> registrants be subject to a requirement to honor a law such
> as the Aussie's have adopted as condition of registering a
> domain name. Since the GAC's membership is drawn from the
> more rigid, controlling ministries and agencies in every country,
> they can do a lot in their secret meetings, and just promulgate
> it.
>
> --tony
