[NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA StewardshipProposal: Final Call for Comments
rhill at hill-a.ch
Fri Jan 9 21:01:26 CET 2015
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at arin.net]
> Sent: vendredi, 9. janvier 2015 20:50
> To: rhill at hill-a.ch
> Cc: ianaxfer at nro.net
> Subject: Re: [NRO-IANAXFER] Internet Number Community IANA
> StewardshipProposal: Final Call for Comments
> On Jan 9, 2015, at 10:46 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch> wrote:
> > As you can see above, I have stated that "we will use
> arbitration" is not
> > sufficiently precise. That is a rationale. Are you saying that it is an
> > insufficient rationale, or are you saying that it is an
> incorrect rationale?
> Insufficient - you've failed to explain why it is necessary for
> the community
> to take a position on this issue, rather than allowing it to be
> determined by
> the RIR legal teams during agreement development and negotiation.
I am saying (1) that the community should review and take a position on all
of the language of the new contract and (2) that the details of the
arbitration clause and the choice of law clause are sufficiently significant
that they should be included in the current document.
This is necessary because those elements are signficant, just as are the
elements that are currently in the document.
I think that what you are saying is that you don't see why they are as
significant as the other elements, so I guess we will have to agree to
disagree: we have different backgrounds and experience so we may not have
the same view of what is or is not significant.
> Interestingly enough, you have indicated that the RIR lawyers
> should develop
> the contract, but apparently are not content that they will make
> use of the
> community guidance (that dispute resolution be handle by
> arbitration), but
> feel that you must have the opportunity to review their legal work.
Not necessarily the details of their legal work, but the actual contract
language. In my experience, the business people (in this case the
community) do read the contract after it is drafted by the laywers. After
all, it is often signed by the business people, not by the lawyers.
> I am
> uncertain if any of the RIRs are seeking additional legal staff, but that
> would appear to be your best recourse for this kind of work; from what I
> can tell it lies far outside the scope of the CRISP team effort.
As I said before, I don't expect the CRISP team to do it. But I would have
expected them to ask the lawyers to do it, and then to come back and present
the draft to this group for its evaluation and endorsement.
> John Curran
> President and CEO
More information about the ianaxfer