[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: ISO intellectual property (was Standards)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 08:01:39 -0500
Here is one the will really rankle the peanut gallery.
ICANN's policy authority is said to be unconstitutional under
the US Constitution. "The domain name addresses, root
server and the major technical protocols that control
the Internet were created by the US Government and
were once it's property in a strict legal sense"; Brolier,
"Public Assets, Private Profits". "Under the Property
Clause, only Congress can permit sale and or disposition
of property belonging to the United States."
"ICANN's authority may also be questioned as an unconstitutional
delegation of Congressional authority. The Supreme Court has
ruled that Congress may not delegate to private parties its
power to make laws, nor make overly broad delegations to
governmental bodies. But here we have a nonprofit
organization registered by the State of California presuming
to govern some of the core processes of the Internet."
Anyone still seriously think the W3C should allow statements
that refer to it as a "governing body of the Internet"? What
its members think it does, or it tries to act to do or appear
to do, the cold implications of the statements and references
can lead to collisions of legitimate authority, and this
in turn, undermines the effectiveness of the body to carry out
its originally stated mission: to incubate technology.
It is a difficult thing to both comply and compete. Specifications
and standards should be two different kinds of documents. IMO,
standards should be accompanied by conformance specifications.
Specifications for systems that become public utilities should
evolve to become standards. For the sake of coherent authority,
these should be under different organizations with different
customers, and of the two, standards organizations should be
held to a higher rule similar to that which historically
guided the conduct of governmental process: "open meetings,
public access to documents, bans against conflict of interest,
and fair admininistrative procedures".
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h