June 2008 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

ICANN Board Approves Censorship Policy for Domain Names Based on Morality: 2 Board Members Speak Against It]
by Jacqueline A. Morris July 7, 2008

July 7, 2008

FYI Robin Gross wrote: > > 26 June 2008 -- Update on Keep the Core Neutral Campaign > > *ICANN Board Approves Censorship Policy for Domain Names Based on > Morality: 2 Board Members Speak Against It* > > Today in Paris the ICANN Board passed the GNSO's controversial > recommendations > <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/council-report-to-board-pdp-new-gtld…> to > censor top level domains based on notions of "morality and public > order", and broadly defined "community" wishes. > > However, 2 ICANN board members, law professors Wendy Seltzer (on > behalf of the At-Large Internet Users) and Susan Crawford, made very > powerful and compelling statements to protect free expression on the > top level of the Internet. Hopefully Professor Crawford is right and > this harm can be mitigated through narrowly tailored implementation. > > However, ICANN staff member Kurt Pritz, who is charged with > implementing these global prohibitions on expression, said this week > in Paris that he strongly favors permitting anyone in the world to > object to a new GTLD based on morality and public order and that will > be staff's recommendation to the board. Not exactly "narrowly > tailored" as Professor Crawford is urging from staff. > > The domain name applicant's freedom of expression rights are "outside > of scope" of this exercise, according to Pritz in a recent new GTLD > briefing meeting. Perhaps ICANN staff forgot about the GNSO's > Principle G to protect the applicant's freedom of expression rights? > > Another problem with ICANN staff's implementation plan is to > auction-off of the most sought after domains and hold "beauty > contests" to decide which applicant "provides more value to the DNS". > Pritz said he could not say how "value" is defined in this analysis > however. > > There should be another opportunity for the public to provide comment > to ICANN on this proposal. > > The statements of Professors Seltzer and Crawford are below. > > Thank you, > Robin > > ----- > > 26 June 2008 ICANN Board Meeting -- transcript extracts: > > >>WENDY SELTZER: Thank you, Peter. > So the at-large, as registrants and as users of domain names, > supports the introduction of new gTLDs. Has no interest in delaying > that process, but does wish to express its concern about two of the > recommendations in the GNSO recommendation set. Specifically, the > morality and public order objection and the objection based on > community objections. > And ALAC and its RALOs, in discussion during this meeting, put > together a statement, which I won't read in its entirety, but > expressed concern that putting these criteria into the gTLD approval > process, even as opportunities for objection, injects ICANN into the > business of making morality and public order decisions, or injects > that into ICANN's processes in a way that, as ALAC put it, debases the > ICANN process. And at-large does not want to see ICANN put into the > business of adjudicating or even delegating the adjudication of > morality or public order or community support. > And so we hope that in implementation, these criteria can be kept > sufficiently narrow so that they are both administrable and > understandable and so that they do not involve ICANN, the > organization, in making, or allowing to be made, determinations about > any claim to generally accepted morality principles. > Thank you. > [ Applause ] > > > > >>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. > I have mixed feelings on this day. I have long supported the entry > of new gTLDs into the root. It has seemed to me that it's > inappropriate for ICANN to use its monopoly position over giving > advice about the existence of new TLDs to create artificial scarcity > in TLDs, where there is no natural scarcity, in my view. > And that has led to a great deal of pent-up demand for the creation > of new TLDs for various reasons, for communities, for new identities, > all over the world. > And in particular, it is urgent that we create IDN gTLDs for the many > language communities around the world that would prefer to have those. > The question presented to the board today is a little strange. > What we're being asked to respond to is whether the recommendations, > the policy recommendations from the GNSO are implementable. And then > staff will go on, and if we decide they are, theoretically, > implementable, will draft the implementation guidelines for the > recommendations made by the GNSO council. > There is a lot of important effort to go into those implementation > details. And I am signing up to these recommendations on the > condition that the implementation work will proceed as planned, and > that the board and the community will have an opportunity to comment > in detail on that implementation work. > In particular, I want to applaud and underline what Wendy Seltzer > just said about the morality and public order recommendation, > recommendation number 6. > Way back when ICANN was formed, that original MOU, which we're now > talking about as the JPA, talked of transitioning the management of > the Domain Name System to the private sector. > And the idea was to figure out whether the private sector had the > capability and resources to assume the important responsibilities > related to the technical management of the DNS. So that was the question. > And so the creation of ICANN, and the question before all of us, was > whether this entity would be a good vessel for allowing the private > sector to take the lead in the management of the Domain Name System. > And, in fact, the white paper in 1998 said that while international > organizations may provide specific expertise or act as advisors to the > new corporation, the U.S. continues to believe, as do most commenters, > that neither national governments acting as sovereigns nor > intergovernmental organizations acting as representatives of > governments should participate in management of Internet names and > addresses. > Of course, national governments now have, and will continue to have, > authority to manage or establish policy for their own ccTLDs. > This wasn't done out of enthusiasm for the free market alone. The > idea was also to avoid having sovereigns use the Domain Name System > for their own content, control, desires. To avoid having the Domain > Name System used as a choke point for content. > Recommendation 6, which is the morality and public order > recommendation, represents quite a sea change in this approach, > because the recommendation is that strings must not be contrary to > generally acceptable legal norms relating to morality and public order > that are recognized under international principles of law. That's the > language of the recommendation. > Now, if this is broadly implemented, this recommendation would allow > for any government to effectively veto a string that made it > uncomfortable. > Having a government veto strings is not allowing the private sector > to lead. It's allowing sovereigns to censor. > Particularly in the absence of straightforward clear limits on what > morality and public order means, people will be unwilling to propose > even controversial strings and we'll end up with a plain vanilla list > of TLDs. > So I am unhappy about this recommendation. I am willing to vote for > it on the strength of the board's discussion and the staff's > undertakings that the standards for this recommendation will be > narrowly stated. > And on my expectation that the board and the community will have an > opportunity to review and approve, or not, the details of those standards. > We do have some global norms of morality and public policy. They are > very few. One of them is incitement to violent, lawless > action. Nobody wants that around the world. > A second might be incitement to or promotion of discrimination based > on race, color, gender, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. > And the third might be incitement to or promotion of child > pornography or other sexual abuse of children. > Otherwise, the question of morality and public order varies > dramatically around the world. It's a diverse, complicated world out > there. And it may not be -- it should not be possible to state that > there is a single standard of morality and public order around the world. > So I am asking that staff come back with an express standard that's > constrained to stated norms, like the three I just listed, found and > expressly in their national treaties. We need clear lines of > adjudication. And I would be content with that kind of implementation. > Another concern of mine is with -- with this list of recommendations > is recommendation 20 which says, "An application will be rejected if > an expert panel determines that there is substantial opposition to it > from a significant portion of the community to which the string may be > explicitly or implicitly targeted." > It's quite unclear how it's all going to work out, whether any > generic applicant could ever win over a community, could ever succeed > in contention for a string over a community that says it's a > community. And I look forward to many more details on this > recommendation as well. > And finally -- and I'm sorry to speak at such length but I think it's > an important moment. Finally, I'm not happy with the idea that there > will be auctions on strings for which there is more than one > applicant. And I note that the GNSO's own recommendations on this > subject don't mention auctions. And I hope the board will not adopt > this approach. > My bottom line is I will vote for this set of recommendations, and I > hope that the implementation will be sensible. > Thank you. > [ Applause ] > > >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: Thank you, Susan. > > -------- > > More Info: > http://ipjustice.org/wp/campaigns/icann/gtlds/ > http://www.keep-the-core-neutral.org/ > > ALAC statement: > https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?new_gtld_document_recommendation_6_draf… > > -------- > > IP JUSTICE > Robin Gross, Executive Director > 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA > p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin(a)ipjustice.org > <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> > > > > > > IP JUSTICE > Robin Gross, Executive Director > 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA > p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin(a)ipjustice.org > <mailto:robin@ipjustice.org> > > >

13 37

Wrapping up the thread/discussion - Apoligies
by Robert Guerra July 6, 2008

July 6, 2008

I wanted to not post any further messages related to the topic on the list, but specific private comments from Evan and others have made me post one last message. First, If my comments offended you veni - well, I do apologize. Secondly, my recent posts on the issue of the fall meeting and internet freedom and how it can be discussed inside ICANN, come not as a result of a "Red Bull binge" as some might suggest - but after consultation and discussion with numerous internet experts, users and NGOs at last week's computers, Freedom & Privacy conference at Yale University. Specifically, the request that ICANN comment on rights at the upcoming Egypt meeting came from the session on Internet Freedom & during the open discussion on technology policy recommendations to the new US administration. Ref: http://www.cfp2008.org/ http://cfp.wikia.com/wiki/CFP08 Thought many on this list might not believe internet freedom should be discussed inside ICANN, suffice it to say that others have a different opinion. I've posted a specific proposal. If there's no support among At-large or regionally at NA RALO, then i will not comment further on this list. regards Robert

12 15

Workshop Feedback
by Izumi AIZU July 2, 2008

July 2, 2008

As the ICANN Paris meeting is just over, I would like to send the "Feedback" for our OneDay workshop here so that you could fill and return them possibly before you go to the airport, or right after you arrive at home. I like to mention that Veronica took an extra effort to help prepare this feedback, in addition to prepare the agenda before the workshop, even after she stepped down from ALAC. I have asked Cheryl if I can send this, and with her permission, I am sending this now. Hope you could give us the fresh, candid, constructive comments so that we can make it better the next time. WIth that thank YOU so much for all the work and company during the week in Paris, and have safe trip back home! izumi

2 2

[Fwd: [governance] (REMINDER: Deadline 15 July) 3rd GigaNet AnnualSymposium - Hyderabad, 2 December 2008 - Call for Papers]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

All, An FYI. I am sure those of you that are of the social engineering types will be salivating accordingly. >:) Happy reading! Alac fellow members, Be sure to read the following excerpt: 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control We encourage papers that examine attempts to impose copyright protection on the Internet through the intermediary of Internet service providers. This theme bridges the topics of network neutrality and intellectual property, inspired by recent incidents, such as a Belgian ISPs order by a court to use deep packet inspection to catch copyright infringement in transit, and Comcast's notorious interference with BitTorrent, which also was probably stimulated in part by copyright protection concerns. Papers can explore the feasibility and state of the art of packet inspection and other relevant techniques, analyze copyright industry and ISP industry interactions from a political economy standpoint, or examine appropriate policy responses to new and powerful packet inspection techniques. 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? We encourage papers on the economic, cultural and compatibility issues raised by the migration to a new standard for Internet domain names that allows them to reflect non-Roman scripts such as Chinese or Cyrillic. Internationalized domain names (IDNs) have a double-edged effect: they widen access for non-English or ASCII readers by making domain names easier to use, but they also introduce compatibility problems among people communicating across language boundaries, as one party may not know how to read or input the address of the other party. There are also interesting questions of competition policy, as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) must decide whether to give new generic top level domains (TLDs) in IDN scripts to incumbents operating ASCII TLDs with similar meanings, or to new competitors. Issues of consumer confusion and cross-linguistic disputes can also arise. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [governance] (REMINDER: Deadline 15 July) 3rd GigaNet AnnualSymposium - Hyderabad, 2 December 2008 - Call for Papers Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:43:18 +0200 Resent-From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> Resent-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:21:50 +0100 From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> Reply-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org,Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> To: Meryem Marzouki <Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr> [Apologies in case of multiple reception.] Dear colleagues, dear all, Please find hereafter the Call for Papers for the 3rd GigaNet Annual Symposium, that will be held in Hyderabad, India, on 2 December 2008, the day prior to the UN Internet Governance Forum. The GigaNet Annual Symposium is an opportunity to showcase some of the best current research on Internet Governance from around the world and provides a venue for scholars to discuss and debate these crucial issues. Previous GigaNet Symposia have been held in Athens, Greece, in 2006 and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2007, in conjuction with the annual meetings of the UN IGF. The GigaNet Program Committee encourages all scholars in the field to submit proposals on their current Internet Governance related research. Deadline for submissions is 15 July 2008. Please distribute widely. The URL of the Symposium CFP is: http:// tinyurl.com/ynsuuf Best regards, Meryem Marzouki (2008 GigaNet Program Committee Chair) -- Meryem Marzouki LIP6/PolyTIC - CNRS 104 avenue du Président Kennedy - 75016 Paris http://www-polytic.lip6.fr :::::::::::::::::::::::::: Third Annual GigaNet Symposium 2 December 2008 - Hyderabad, India Hyderabad International Conference Center (HICC) Call for Papers The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector, and civil society. Each year, GigaNet organizes a one-day research symposium in conjunction with the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and in the same premises. After the first two editions in Athens, Greece (October 2006) and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (November 2007), the third GigaNet Annual Symposium will be held on December 2, 2008, in Hyderabad, India, the day before the 3rd IGF meeting. Attendance at the Symposium will be open to all and free of charge. The Symposium will be at the same location as the IGF and registration with the UN as an IGF participant may be necessary to gain entry to the building. This is a call for papers from scholars interested in presenting an original research paper at the conference. Submission topics In addition to papers on methodological aspects of Internet governance-related studies, this year's Symposium particularly encourages submissions on the following themes, which are described in more detail below: 1. Comparing Internet Governance to other Global Governance Domains 2. Networked Governance Theories and the Institutionalization of Internet Governance 3. The Role of NGOs, Social Movements and Civil Society in Internet Governance 4. Year 3 of the UN Internet Governance Forum: Assessing its Structure, Process and Impact 5. Law and Jurisdictions in Internet Governance 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? Submission requirements Applicants should submit: 1) an abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, of the proposed paper that describes the main research question(s), methods employed, and the papers relevance and value to the thematic area; and 2) a one page summary curriculum vitae listing in particular the applicants current institutional affiliation(s), advanced degrees, scholarly publications relevant to Internet governance, and web sites, if available. Submission materials should be emailed directly to the chairperson of the 2008 Program Committee, Dr. Meryem Marzouki, at Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr by no later than July 15, 2008, midnight GMT. Members of the 2008 program committee will review submissions according to the same criteria. In order to ensure fairness of the evaluation process, submissions that do not conform to the requested format will not be considered. The Program Committee will notify applicants of its decisions via email by September 15, 2008. A full paper upon which oral or poster presentation will be based must be delivered to the same address by October 10, 2008, midnight GMT in order for the author(s) to be included in the program. While GigaNet asserts no copyright to authors work, it is expected that the version of the paper presented orally or as poster will be made available for posting on the GigaNet website. Travel scholarships for a few outstanding accepted papers may be available for scholars who would otherwise be unable to attend. Applicants who are accepted will be informed of these opportunities after September 15. 2008 GigaNet Symposium Program Committee: - Ana Abreu, Labeurb/Unicamp and Paulista University, Campinas (SP), Brazil - Slavka Antonova, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand - Meryem Marzouki, LIP6/PolyTIC-CNRS Laboratory, Paris, France (Chair) - John Mathiason, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse (NY), USA - Milton Mueller, Syracuse University School of Information Studies, Syracuse (NY), USA - Max Senges, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain - Rolf H. Weber, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland Important dates: - 15 July 2008: abstract submission deadline (to be sent to: Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr) - 15 September 2008: notification to applicants - 10 October 2008: full papers due - 15 October 2008: 2008 GigaNet symposium program finalized - 2 December 2008: 2008 GigaNet symposium, HICC, Hyderabad, India Topics Description 1. Comparing Internet Governance to other Global Governance Domains The concept of global governance has flourished in a number of fields: trade, security, environment, development -- as well as Internet. However, most general analyses of global governance ignore global Internet governance. Conversely, very few Internet governance analyses are conducted through comparative frameworks. Submissions are invited to help frame Internet governance in a broader, global governance perspective. What could be learnt from experiences of global governance in other fields? Are there any general instruments and methods of global governance, irrespective of the domain area it addresses? Could some similarities or invariants of a global governance process be identified? 2. Networked Governance Theories and the Institutionalization of Internet Governance The global policy discourse on Internet governance involves more diverse actors and newly created institutions. There is a need to explore the dynamics of this changing institutionalization process through theoretical and empirical analysis. Recent work explores network forms of organization in political and governance contexts, at national and international levels, most notably with the concept of transgovernmental networks to solve sector-specific problems. We call for papers that apply, test and criticize ideas of networked governance in the context of global Internet governance. We encourage submissions that analyze collaborative policy-making in related institutions and interactions between them. We are especially interested in papers that critically analyze these forms of governance in terms of fairness and accountability and their relationship to democratic principles. Can presently excluded or minority communities enhance their participation? Beyond the expert discourse and the interplay amongst dedicated stakeholders, can networked governance represent people, rather than just established interests and agencies? What are the available tools and practices to facilitate their participation and deliberation, in terms of discourse, collaboration and decision-making? 3. Role of NGOs, Social Movements and Civil Society in Internet Governance Important but subtle transformations have occurred in the role and participation of non-governmental and non-business actors in the 6 years since the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS). WSIS witnessed a somewhat usual situation, where organized social actors participated from inside the process through structured non- governmental organizations, and social movements exercised some more radical pressure from the outside. Since the creation of the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), this mode of participation has turned into a consensus-based cooperation, where civil society actors are supposed to contribute on equal footing with governments and business actors, in most cases in their individual capacity and rather disconnected from social movements. We seek papers that analyze the evolution of involved social actors and their structuring, especially with regards to the historical evolution of the concept of civil society, and to explore in which ways and to what extent these transformations may be related to the move from government to governance. 4. Year 3 of the UN Internet Governance Forum: Assessing its Structure, Process and Impact The WSIS created and mandated the IGF to address critical, value- adding global Internet governance functions that cannot be entirely performed by any existing institution. This includes: highlighting emerging issues, assessing the embodiment of WSIS principles, and strengthening the participation of stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms. Furthermore, the IGF was defined as multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent body; it has been structured through a Secretariat, a multi-stakeholder advisory group (MAG), and a special advisory group to the MAGs chair; and for 3 years, it has been operating as an open discursive space, prepared through open consultation sessions. Submissions are invited to explore whether the IGF has fulfilled its mandate at this step, which difficulties can be identified and how they could be solved. Has the IGF structure, management and advisory mechanisms proven to be adequate and compliant with the WSIS Tunis Agenda requirements? What strengths could be reinforced and weaknesses overcome? 5. Law and Jurisdictions in Internet Governance The Internet must now be considered a major factor when elaborating regulatory principles to deal with the circulation of content and data and with the protection of the general communications infrastructure. This is not an easy task because of its implications on the respect for universal human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, where States differ widely on their implementation of these international standards, even among coherent regional entities. The task becomes even more complex due to conflicts of competences among overlapping jurisdictions. We seek papers that identify and explore conflicts among national laws and attempts to harmonize them. We also seek papers that explore the relevance to the global Internet of public and private international law currently in force or being considered in ongoing international negotiations. Submissions analyzing the role and positions of various players in these processes are also encouraged. 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control We encourage papers that examine attempts to impose copyright protection on the Internet through the intermediary of Internet service providers. This theme bridges the topics of network neutrality and intellectual property, inspired by recent incidents, such as a Belgian ISPs order by a court to use deep packet inspection to catch copyright infringement in transit, and Comcast's notorious interference with BitTorrent, which also was probably stimulated in part by copyright protection concerns. Papers can explore the feasibility and state of the art of packet inspection and other relevant techniques, analyze copyright industry and ISP industry interactions from a political economy standpoint, or examine appropriate policy responses to new and powerful packet inspection techniques. 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? We encourage papers on the economic, cultural and compatibility issues raised by the migration to a new standard for Internet domain names that allows them to reflect non-Roman scripts such as Chinese or Cyrillic. Internationalized domain names (IDNs) have a double- edged effect: they widen access for non-English or ASCII readers by making domain names easier to use, but they also introduce compatibility problems among people communicating across language boundaries, as one party may not know how to read or input the address of the other party. There are also interesting questions of competition policy, as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) must decide whether to give new generic top level domains (TLDs) in IDN scripts to incumbents operating ASCII TLDs with similar meanings, or to new competitors. Issues of consumer confusion and cross-linguistic disputes can also arise. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe(a)lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [LAC-Discuss] user_s summit 2009 and icann committment to be useroriented
by Aislan Vargas Basilio June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

Tal cual Matias! Así que tenemos que pensar. Congratulations for all. Saludos, Aislan Vargas Basilio AGEIA DENSI Brasil Matías Altamira escreveu: > Al ser México el lugar para hacer el Summit, los latinoamericanos nos > tenemos que poner a trabajar para que se un éxito la reunión en nuestro > continente. > > Saludos, > > Matías > IIISI Rep. > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: lac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:lac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Annette > Muehlberg > Enviado el: Jueves, 26 de Junio de 2008 02:08 p.m. > Para: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > CC: lac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > euro-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > Wendy Seltzer; apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; > na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Asunto: [LAC-Discuss] user_s summit 2009 and icann committment to be > useroriented > > All, > > We finally made it and will be able to organize a userŽs summit in Mexico, > March 2009! > > I think it would be great if we could make sure, that the userŽs summit will > not be something seperated from the ICANN Meeting. Instead, ICANN should > show its committment to strengthen its bottom up structure and be user > oriented in all its policies. > > For the public discussion my proposal is, to approach all icann bodies - > such as the board, various committees, the advisory councils, the ICANN > supporting organisations and their constituencies as well as icann staff. We > should ask them - throughout the whole icann meetings whenever they give a > public presentations - to explain what the respective issues/ policy > proposals mean for the internet end-user. > > I think implementing such a procedure would be a great step forward. > > > > Best greetings and many thanks to all, who have been working very hard to > make the summit possible. > > Annette > > _______________________________________________ > LAC-Discuss mailing list > LAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic > ann.org > > Homepage for the region: http://www.lacralo.org > > Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent to the list > are more accurate: > http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#a > nexo1 > > > _______________________________________________ > LAC-Discuss mailing list > LAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss_atlarge-lists.i… > > Homepage for the region: http://www.lacralo.org > > Posting guidelines to ensure machine translations of emails sent to the list are more accurate: http://www.funredes.org/mistica/english/emec/method_emec/presentation.html#… > > >

4 3

Re: [At-Large] [ga] GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

Sotiris and all, Your right as far as GoDaddy is concerned, it appears. I am sure my friends in Canada find this as unsurprising and sleazy as I do. Sadly some of them ( users and Registrants ) have been tarnished as a result, as well as a result of ICANN's poor oversight along with DOC/NTIA's poor oversight of ICANN. I as an American, appologize to my fellow Canadians for the actions of a Sr. Executive of an American company for their sleazy and disgusting business practices. I hope that our good friends in Canada and everywhere will except my own personal appology for the actions of GoDaddy Inc. Not all American business operate in this ugly, sleasy and disgusting manner. Unfortunately GoDaddy has. >:( I am also fairly sure that if you check, which I and some of our members have, that GoDaddy is also most prolific registrar of Child Porn Domain Names as well. But I am sure DHS and USDOJ as well as DOC/NTIA haven't looked into that "Element" of the GoDaddy - ICANN relationship, eh? But we can all hope that someday they will. I only hope that the do so sometime in my lifetime, but I am even very doubtful of that... >:( sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com wrote: > > http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/29/0625249 > > It's a looter's game after all, even with established and profitable > business models... > > Still waiting for you to explin howa .bank TLD will add value to the > namespace. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers
by Danny Younger June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/29/0625249

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100, 000-plus price tag
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

Roberto and all, Good point and all true Roberto. What's better though is cooperation between the root structure systems. Oh I forgot, ICANN doesn't want to do that, do they. Shame that. More importantly is the collisions ( non physical ) of DN's that share the same TLD but are on different root structure systems. Who was first in Commerce will and should have precedence, logically and legally speaking. Same is true for "Passing off" under the Lanham act in the US, and by International practice in the UN. Again, "first use in commerce" will and should prevail, legally, and logically speaking on a global scale as well. This where the problem is now, has been to an extent, and unless ICANN cooperates with other Root server structures, non physical collisions will ensue. That sets up a host of legal considerations extraneous, and inclusive of the Lanham Act, including, but not limited to abusive business practices act depending on who had first use of any particular TLD or DN in a TLD name space, and Restraint of Trade statutes, both US, and other countries similar statutes, and in accordance with UN practice under WIPO. This would be the case with .bank in Danny's example earlier on this thread. Yet I still applaud ICANN's opening up the gTLD and IDN gTLD name space as it offers more use in commercial and non-commercial activity. But ICANN must learn to share, or be faced with potential and likely protracted litigation which will tarnish ICANN's image further, create confusion amongst users/consumers globally, and likely engender criminal prosecution of ICANN's own Bod and Staff on commercially based grounds under Restraint of Trade grounds. I for one would not like to see this happen. How about you? I want a happy, fair and honest ICANN, don't you Roberto? Roberto Gaetano wrote: > I am missing something here. > We have been flooded over the years with emails that have been stating how > successfule alternate roots are, on how ISPs all over the world are > increasingly pointing to a system that is able to override what is in the > "ICANN root" with a different choices, and so on. > Now, what's the problem now? If ICANN delegates some TLDs that have a > different resolution in a different root system, all what it takes for who > wants to address the latter rather than the one in the ICANN root is to > change your setting and point to the alternate system. > It's called "competition", I am being told. There's nothing wrong in having > different highways systems, as it already happens with different railroad > systems. > Cheers, > Roberto > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > [mailto:owner-ga@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com > > Sent: Sunday, 29 June 2008 01:30 > > To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > $100, 000-plus price tag > > > > > > What a load of crap Danny! Are you bucking for employment at > > ICANN again or something? > > > > Truly a sad day for the Internet indeed. > > > > Here's an analogy for you: What if your town along with your > > neighbouring towns have simply lost confidence in the > > existing Highway or Levee authorities because they have been > > siphoning off the the money that was intended for maintenance > > to say... fight pointless wars overseas or some such > > nonsense... So, the highway and levee systems around your > > town(s) are not what you and your fellow country bumpkins > > were hoping for when you paid your taxes like good little > > sheeple. So, your town and its neighbouring towns decide to > > build your own highways and levee systems ON YOUR OWN PRIVATE > > LAND. You end up running into many others in neighbouring > > towns and cities who feel the same way across the country and > > all together and at your own expense you end up setting up > > your system of highways (or levees). Then, all of a sudden, > > the looters at the now anachronistic Highway/Levee Authority > > move in and take over your highways and levees because they > > have the guns, bombs, and HAARP. How would that make you feel > > Mr. Establishment Apologist? > > > > Regards, > > > > Sotiris > > > > > > > > John, > > > > > > I don't see it that way. Let me try to use an analogy. > > There are a > > > set of properties that are in a poorly-trafficked side of > > town. Most > > > folks can't easily find these properties as they are not > > listed in the > > > maps (search engines) that most people will use. They provide some > > > local benefit to those that own the properties and to the > > limited set > > > of neighbors that are aware of the property locations, but > > as they are > > > not situated on the main thoroughfares, most will just pass them by > > > without even realizing that they are there. > > > > > > The owners of these properties can arrange to move these > > structures to > > > the main highway by entering into a leasehold arrangement with the > > > highway department (the same way that a McDonald's, for > > example, can > > > occupy a prime rest stop location along an interstate thruway). Of > > > course, these property owners may have to compete with > > other property > > > owners to obtain such a lease. > > > > > > And yes, there are times when a major highway might pass through a > > > minor property development and create a loss situation for > > a property > > > owner as the highway builders exercise their eminent domain > > rights. > > > In such cases, there are victims, and often enough such > > victims are not compensated. > > > > > > Anyone that has watched the development plans for this highway has > > > known that it has been many years in the making; certainly > > enough time > > > for property owners to make their plans. > > > > > > Most would say: you can't stop the march of progress. Most would > > > also agree that progress outweighs the needs of the few > > whose assets > > > might be damaged. Such is life. > > > > > > Those that choose not to get out of the way of a > > steamroller will wind > > > up being crushed -- that's just the way that it is. If you seek to > > > grow your properties, the consider entering into the > > process set up by > > > the highway department. You have just as much right as > > anyone else to > > > bid on a lease (and ICANN leases are forever). Put together a > > > business plan and field a bid. It's a better option than > > grousing over the current situation. > > > > > > regards, > > > Danny > > > > > > --- On Sat, 6/28/08, John Palmer > > <jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net> wrote: > > > > > >> From: John Palmer <jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net> > > >> Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 4:27 PM This is nothing but > > an attempt > > >> at wholesale theft of property from one group of people (small > > >> businesses) by an organization so that they can sell that stolen > > >> property to rich and powerful people. Most of the gTLDs that are > > >> popular are already owned and operated by companies, most of them > > >> small businesses with limited resources. You know how > > justice works > > >> in the country - You get justice if you can buy it, > > otherwise, you're > > >> out of luck. They are now proposing to do what they did with .BIZ > > >> back in 2000 on a wide scale basis. > > >> > > >> Whats new? ICANN is all about stealing things it does not own and > > >> profiting off of it. We all know, for instance, that the UDRP is > > >> nothing but a scheme that allows rich and powerful > > interests to steal > > >> domains from poor people. > > >> > > >> ICANN, Dick Cheney, George Bush, the Bilderburgs, > > Hapsburgs, Vladimir > > >> Putin, Robert Mugabe - no difference between any of them. > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Dominik Filipp" > > >> <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> > > >> To: <sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com>; > > >> <ga(a)gnso.icann.org> > > >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:59 PM > > >> Subject: RE: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Sotiris, > > >> > > >> bright conclusions as usual, but I see one positive aspect > > on it, a > > >> decrease of Verisign's .COM dominance. Just imagine perfect URL > > >> addresses such as > > >> > > >> http://microsoft > > >> http://ibm > > >> http://xerox > > >> > > >> affordable for the rich though. > > >> > > >> But all the rest in your post remains perfectly valid. > > >> > > >> Dominik > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: owner-ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> [mailto:owner-ga@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > >> sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com > > >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 5:03 PM > > >> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> Subject: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> > > >> > > >> All, > > >> > > >> See article: > > >> > > http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4218 > > >> 629 > > >> .ece > > >> > > >> One last money grab by the looters at ICANN and their moocher > > >> cronies. > > >> The day of the truly international, standardized Internet is over. > > >> This move is a pretty transparent attempt to dominate any > > DNS system > > >> by a bunch of shortsighted and pigheaded individuals who > > have all the > > >> visionary capacity of a rotten potato. The real (and > > >> unstated) intent of > > >> this move is to preclude the advent of extra-ICANN DNS > > systems in any > > >> language on earth, such that the resulting (or continuing) US > > >> dominated addressing system will remain within the purview of > > >> American control. In effect, what ICANN is telling the > > world is that > > >> no country/nation has the right to create its own DNS as they will > > >> simply collide it into irrelevancy and make a handsome "profit" at > > >> the same time! > > >> > > >> A sad day for Internet users worldwide. > > >> > > >> Sotiris > > >> > > >> P.S. I will be unsubscribing from this list as there is no > > longer any > > >> reason for me to follow the meaningless blabber hereon. > > >> Good luck to all > > >> of you (except to the looters and moochers, I hope your genitalia > > >> rot). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: winmail.dat > winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef > Encoding: base64 Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ga] ECTA Letter to Twomey
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Danny and all, Thank you for making us all aware of this VERY interesting letter to Mr. Twomey and ICANN via the ISPCP rather than in a more open and transparent manner. I remain unsurprised, as do our members that ecta and ICANN continue to be less than transparent and open with the larger internet, user, and registrant community. As such I hope that Glen will put out an announcement regarding this letter and in doing so seeks the user and registrant community sector of the private sector as to their opinion on the contents and tone of this letter accordingly. I know that a good number of our members are ECTA members, registrants, and trade mark holders and do not share the ECTA's position and concern expressed in this letter from ECTA and none that I know of, or have heard of even, knew that this letter was sent or considered at any time. This therefore leads to the belief that the ECTA members were not broadly consulted before this letter was sent, and as such cannot be considered representative of the full or majority of the ECTA members accordingly. -----Original Message----- >From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >Sent: Jun 28, 2008 9:12 AM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >Subject: [ga] ECTA Letter to Twomey > > >The European Communities Trade Mark Association has sent a letter to Paul Twomey regarding GNSO improvements. It doesn't appear in the ICANN Correspondence pages, but may be found via the ISPCP list -- see http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ispcp/msg00433.html > > > Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Community Members Request an ALAC Investigation
by Danny Younger June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Dear all, I have received a request to have the ALAC investigate an issue -- it concerns possible gaming of the .asia sunrise cycle. The preliminary details are spelled out below. Please advise the course of action that will be taken by the Committee. Thank you, Danny Younger --- On Fri, 6/27/08, Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> wrote: > From: Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> > Subject: Danny: Possible dot.ASIA Front-Running scheme > To: dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com > Date: Friday, June 27, 2008, 11:42 PM > Danny, > > Please run this on the ALAC mail-list. > > It looks like there is a 'Front-Running' scheme > going on with the .ASIA > Auctions > > http://www.dotasia-complot.org/ > > http://www.dotasia-complot.org/cat30.html > > The Guy (Thomas Rucker) is doing his homework, its worthy > of a ALAC probe, > that may flush out the bushes > > Thnx

1 0