[LINK] Fwd: Australian Barrister Accuses ICANN of AntitrustViolations

[Patrick Corliss]

Rick Welykochy <rick@praxis.com.au> wrote:

> Apologies if my moment of glibness offended you or Mr Lindon.

Hi Rick

Thank you for your nice apology.  I am really not at all worried for myself
but Mr Lindon really does deserve better.  A private email to me from another
person, included the following description of Len Lindon:

    Has initiated litigation against the Commonwealth several times.
    Active as anti-nuclear and Aboriginal Genocide campaigner since
    at least the mid 80s.  Concerned with gender imbalance among the
    judiciary. Stood for Senate (NT) in 1990

That seems to give the flavour of the man.  It's just that I assumed you had
read the High Court case Len Lindon v The Commonwealth of Australia as you
were quoting from it.  The URL is:

  http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/unrep264.html

QUOTE
2.  Mr Lindon is a part-time barrister.  He argued his case with intelligence.
He drew to my attention a long line of decisions in this and other courts
concerning proceedings brought by him.  He formerly went under the name of
"Citizen Limbo".  It is by that name that he argued before the Court of Appeal
of the Northern Territory an appeal which arose out of an alleged trespass
upon prohibited land, namely the Joint Defence Space Research Facility near
Alice Springs (commonly known as "Pine Gap") (1).  A glance at the report
reveals that, in defence to the charge, he raised the alleged illegality of
nuclear weapons by international law (2).  He suggested that the Facility was
tainted with that illegality.  The defence was rejected.

3.  In 1989, Mr Lindon was before this Court in an application for
declarations concerning the illegality of the supply and export of arms and
other military supplies (3).  An application for an order for the waiver of
fees was rejected by Brennan J on the basis that the application, as pleaded,
lacked "an intelligible formation of the claim" (4).
END QUOTE

I think you were possibly surprised that I had extended the argument from
ICANN to "millions of dead".  But can you see why?  The High Court was clearly
not persuaded by Mr Lindon's arguments against Pine Gap, nuclear weapons and
the export of arms.  Basically because "There's no law against it" !!

As far as ICANN is concerned, there is little doubt that they hold a monopoly
position.  As a Linux man, you'd not approve of Microsoft's IT dominance.  I
suppose you'd also favour low prices and Open Systems.

That is exactly the stand that Len Lindon is taking.  Len is also campaigning
against the sort of bigotry your family would have experienced.  I'd say you'd
be natural partners and I hope we see much more of both of you.

                     http://www.clickhumanrights.com/index.html

Good luck and thanks again.

Best wishes
Patrick Corliss


----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Welykochy <rick@praxis.com.au>
To: Patrick Corliss <patrick@quad.net.au>
Cc: Link List <link@www.anu.edu.au>; Len Lindon <info@humanrights.com.au>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: [LINK] Fwd: Australian Barrister Accuses ICANN of
AntitrustViolations


> Patrick Corliss wrote:
>
> > I have no idea what's in your heart when you make that sort of glib
comment
> > but Mr Linden is your champion against ICANN right now.
>
> Apologies if my moment of glibness offended you or Mr Lindon. Although I am
> not looking for a champion against ICANN at the moment, my remark
> served little more than a passing crack at an age old battle between an
> entrenched unjust system and those who would try to thwart it.
>
> > So let's respect people like Len Lindon, please.
>
> All due respect to Len, for if you read any other postings I've made lately,
> there don't seem to be much respect on offer for our "system".
>
>
> Cheers
> Rick W
>
> --
> Rick Welykochy || Praxis Services Pty Limited
> "Tired of being a crash test dummy for Microsoft? Try Linux"
>