Re: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to [re open Board meetings] ...

Martin B. Schwimmer (martys@interport.net)
Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:50:53 -0500


Gordon Cook says that Esther Dyson said to him off the record (double
hearsay with a twist):

"But you have got to understand that half our board is not
>American and they think the US federal open meetings law is something they
>should not have to subject themselves to."

Forget for the sake of the following whether or not this was in fact said.
Treat it as a hypothetical situation where the newly drafted ICANN by-laws
are getting a reality test:

What does California Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation law say on this
point?

Does "US federal open meetings law" preempt Cal NPPBC law on the relevant
point?

OK, what is the relevant law?

Note to SO by-law drafters: whether or not the ICANN by-laws are ambiguous
on this point, there is still time to make sure the SO by-laws are not
ambiguous on open meetings.

p.s. I have heard that some folk would like the DNSO to be incorporated in
Europe. Without addressing the positives of that suggestion, one negative
that occurs to me is that it might make for a conflict of laws mess when
ICANN and DNSO make a contract, take a joint action, etc. Make up some
fact patterns and try them out.