Dave Crocker got the rebuke from karl and michael froomkin he so richly deserved. It's too bad you had to come to his defense. >karl's initial request was for unlimited access (fine) AND ability >to release without limit any material he saw fit. Vint you are mistaken. please document you assertion. I have followed karls statements very carefully and he has been extremely careful to say that he never asserted such a right. Cite your source please. > ICANN responded with a procedure to protect confidentiality. it took ICANN 10 months to come up with a procedure that had karl signed it would have been an effective gag order > Karl never took advantage of that (others did) I understand there was one other a director named davidson who signed and then looked at the records, said golly gee i don't see anything here karl you just aren't a team player. well VINT no kidding karl sure isn't a team player..... he was elected on a platform that ICANN need to be cleaned up. > but instead sued. I would note that his position as to >access/release changed, at least as I understand it, after the suit >was filed. > >Vint I am sure he will speak for himself but it is my understanding that his position on release of records NEVER changed. Karl gets records in non confidential records that are in electronic form tomorrow VINT, records ICANN considers 'confidential' he will inspect on sight. I think it will be interesting to see whether the general ledger is withheld as confidential. BUT VINT, lets look at the court record OK rather than make convenient but erroneous assertions. http://cryptome.org/auerbach-icann.htm Having considered the applicable law and the undisputed facts presented herein, the court concludes that paragraphs 3, 5, and 6 of the [ICANN] Inspection Procedures conflict with section 6334 and Art. V, §21 of the Bylaws by unreasonably restricting directors' access to corporate records and depriving directors of inspection rights afforded them by law. Cook: Vint, that is the judge saying ICANN's procedures were illegal. Furthermore, Lynn's 10/5/01 letter violates both section 6334 and Bylaws Article V, Section 21 because it deprives Auerbach of the inspection rights he has under law and imposes such unreasonable requirements as having to sign a confidentiality agreement and having to pursue burdensome review in any effort to enforce his inspection rights. Additionally, the Inspection Procedures here apparently have not even been adopted by the ICANN Board of Directors, but were promulgated by an ad hoc group of functionaries consisting of the Audit Committee, Louis Touton, Diane Schroeder, and Lynn (Auerbach Dec. Ex. 17, 18, 21). Cook: Vint: sounds like the judge is saying that the procedures you are complaining about were never taken up by the board of which you are chair but were promulgated by ICANN staff. Sad to see you defending this charade. the judge concluded: Based on the undisputed facts, there is no triable issue as to any material fact and Petitioner Auerbach is entitled to judgment as a matter of law granting his Petition for Writ of Mandate. Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment is denied. A Writ shall issue, the terms to be determined at the hearing after argument. ==== Vint you should download the PDF cited by Michael Froomkin which -- ======================================================== The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) cook@cookreport.com Subscription info & prices at http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtml Summary of content for 10 years at http://cookreport.com/past_issues.shtml Here Comes Asset Based Telecom A 120 page - Aug Sept issue available at http://cookreport.com/11.05-6.shtml ========================================================