ALAC’s brutal takedown of that “aggressive” ICANN 74 coronavirus waiver
ICANN’s At-Large Advisory Committee has accused ICANN of being aggressive, intimidating and insensitive by demanding attendees at next month’s public meeting in the Netherlands sign a far-reaching legal waiver.
In a remarkable submission to the ICANN board of directors, ALAC says the waiver, which basically amounts to a get-out-of-jail-free card for the Org, leaves a “lasting unpleasant taste in the mouths” of the volunteers who make up the ICANN community.
ALAC wants the board to clarify whether it had any involvement in the drafting of the waiver or in approving it but asks that it “take control of the situation and ensure that this waiver does not endanger both its relationship with the ICANN Community”.
The waiver requires in-person attendees to absolve ICANN of all blame if they catch Covid-19 — or anything else — “even if arising from the negligence or fault of ICANN”. Virtual attendees don’t have to sign it.
ICANN has suggested in a separate FAQ that it may not be worth the pixels it’s written with, which ALAC points out is inconsistent with the plan language of the waiver.
ALAC also includes a list of 10 reasons the waiver is a terrible idea. Here’s a few:
10. It is insensitive to the global community as it can be interpreted as an exportation of U.S.-based litigious culture.
4. This kind of blanket waiver could be unenforceable and, in that case, serves only as intimidation.
3. The waiver infringes on individual rights.
1. It leaves a lasting unpleasant taste in the mouths of participants contributing to ICANN’s multistakeholder model — which is presented as a source of pride and accomplishment to the internet governance community.
The waiver already the subject of a Request for Reconsideration by the heads of registrar Blacknight and the Namibian ccTLD registry, but ALAC’s comprehensive takedown, which has dozens of signatories, arguably carries more weight.
ALAC’s letter can be downloaded here. It’s not been published on ICANN’s correspondence page. Hat tip to Rubens Kuhl for the link.
If you find this post or this blog useful or interestjng, please support Domain Incite, the independent source of news, analysis and opinion for the domain name industry and ICANN community.
I’m pretty sure the waiver is actually unenforceable here in the Netherlands. You can’t just waive your liability away, unless the other party is a business.
Legally it would be better to limit the liability to whatever ICANN’s insurance covers. A judge will be more accepting of those terms.
And it’s also impossible to hold an organisation accountable for people catching covid, as there are no covid regulations in place in the Netherlands. So there are no Covid-related safety regulations that you should’ve followed.