As best as I and others have been able to discern, the order in question is a subpoena to ICANN pertaining to contracts, financial information and communications with the Iranian government over their names and addresses. The claims of granted control appear to be inaccurate -- all of the reporting on the matter have been childish to the extent of saying Dot-Iran (.ایران) is in Arabic. The next step would be for ICANN to challenge the request, and one might expect that communities such as this one would have an opportunity to amicus along the way.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net> wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2014, at 9:13 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net> wrote: > > > On Jun 27, 2014, at 00:07 , Larry Sheldon <larryshel...@cox.net> wrote: > > > >> > http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2014/06/court-ruling-israeli-and-us-terrorism.html > >> > >> Have not seen much discussion about this. > > > > That would be a horrifically bad precedent to set. I hope this insanity > stops before it get started. > > Anyone have a link to the actual ruling? This URL is to a very > positionally-specific interpretation of events, which is fairly > disconnected from reality on the ICANN side… It’s quite possible it’s an > equally clueless interpretation of the court decision. In any event, even > if the court was as clueless as this implies, it won’t go anywhere. > > -Bill > > > > > -- *Collin David Anderson* averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C.
