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

ALAC Report for the Paris ICANN Meeting
by At-Large Staff June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Dear All: We have the pleasure of providing you with the attached Report of the At-Large Advisory Committee for the Paris ICANN Meeting. This will be posted shortly. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

2 1

Re: [At-Large] [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100, 000-plus price tag
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Sotiris and all, This is one time amongst a host of others that I did not, I actually agree with Vint. The Internet is a public resource or is supposed to be. But than again aren't governments part of the Public as well? My answer is yes, but only part! Yet governments do, can, and will, directly, indirectly, or by legal statute, regulate the Internet. How far this will go in certain countries is a matter of good guessing and significant political intrigue. Oh my, what drama! And of course all in the name of good for the internet and good for the users, and introduced by various social engineering crackpots of multiple politically diverse bents. How lovely! sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com wrote: > > In the course of time we will have good new TLDs that will serve > > particular needs. I, for one, look forward to the possibilities offered > > by a .bank TLD. These TLDS will add value to the namespace, and they will > > be readily found by those using common search engine applications. And > > yes, we will still have some remaining vanity TLDs outside of the root > > that almost no one will find that will continue to offer little to the > > broader Internet community. > > That is a rosy picture indeed. Personally, I don't see the need for a > .bank TLD as the existing namespace has not hindered online banking > developments in any way, at least not in any way that I can see... Perhaps > you could explain to us all *how* a .bank TLD will add value to the > namespace, except of course to the registry/registrars who will peddle the > TLD? > > When Jon Postel stated his opposition to the expansion of the TLD > namespace, it was because he actually had a clear understanding of what he > was about. I think you need to take a look at an interesting article you > may not have run across yet entitled "Vint Cerf Wonders If We Need To > Nationalize the Internet" see: > http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/25/vint-cerf-wonders-if-we-need-to-nation… > > Surely Atlas must be shrugging these days... > > Regards, > > Sotiris 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] ICANN domains high jacked - interesting message - and so true
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

Dr. Joe and all, This is not the first time, nor shall it likely be the last time ICANN's Root servers have been hacked as long as the technical expertise at the IANA continues to decline as it has sense 1999. Even though ICANN has partly implemented DNSSEC on a few Root servers, that implementation was not a FULL implementation and was not coupled with IPSEC or securing the root servers themselves. I warned of this the first time back in 2000, and was rebuffed. Now that yet again ICANN's security folks have shown that they don't know what the heck they are doing, one has to wonder how they can be considered good stuarts of the security and safety of the DNS. Joe Baptista wrote: > > Interesting to see that the ICANN and IANA domains were high jacked > yesterday. > > http://www.zone-h.org/content/view/14973/30/ > > Basically they hacked the main page and left the following message > > # NeTDevilz # > > You think that you control the domains but you don't! Everybody knows > wrong. We control the domains including ICANN! > > Don't you believe us? > > haha :) > > (Lovable Turkish hackers group) > > ©2008 NetDevilz Co. > We're not first,But We're the BEST! > regards > joe baptista > > p.s. these hackers have the right general idea. ICANN has no control > over root operations. Years ago they had over 90% market share in > root - now thats down to about 70%. So it pleases me to no end that > the hackers have heard the message i've been going on for years. > There is no ICANN root monopoly. > > -- > Joe Baptista > www.publicroot.org > PublicRoot Consortium > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, > Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052) > Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084 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

Money influences? Telecom Immunity Flip-Floppers Got More Telecom Money
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

All, A real USER issue. Kudos to Maplight and Larry Lessig! A nice analysis by Maplight.org indicating that those Democratic representatives who changed their vote on telecom immunity between March and June received on average http://www.maplight.org/FISA_June08 40% more in contributions from telecom interests than those Democrats who held firm. Maplight asks, "Why did these ninety-four House members have a change of heart? Their constituents deserve answers." Across both parties, representatives who voted for immunity in June had received almost twice a much telecom money as those who voted against. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/telecom-amnesty.html Wired's coverage includes a quote from Larry Lessig, who is on the Maplight board: "Money corrupts the process of reasoning. [Lawmakers] get a sixth sense of how what they do might affect how they raise money. 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

[Fwd: [governance] dot.ASIA Front-Running scheme claimed]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

Yehuda, Done. Dot.Asia has been a moderately too a very poorly manage registry sense it's very conception. It remains so. It comes as no surprise that others have finally taken note and interest in recognizing this more broadly recognized fact. It is rather amazing to me that ICANN has not yet redeligated this Registry to more a more appropriate party or parties. But this is partly due to ICANN itself having glaring and significant management and leadership deficiencies that have been shown time and time again. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [governance] dot.ASIA Front-Running scheme claimed Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:53:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "Yehuda Katz" <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> Reply-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org,"Yehuda Katz" <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org All, Please (cross-post) 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. ____________________________________________________________ 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

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

Total of 67 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 27 00:53:02 EDT 2008 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 32.84% | 22 | 18.94% | 201559 | jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com 1.49% | 1 | 38.35% | 408208 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 10.45% | 7 | 14.75% | 156995 | iza at anr.org 5.97% | 4 | 4.26% | 45319 | vanda at uol.com.br 4.48% | 3 | 2.51% | 26667 | wendy at seltzer.com 4.48% | 3 | 2.32% | 24689 | jefsey at jefsey.com 4.48% | 3 | 2.14% | 22831 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 4.48% | 3 | 2.07% | 22036 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 4.48% | 3 | 1.94% | 20687 | annette.muehlberg at web.de 2.99% | 2 | 1.63% | 17330 | nick.ashton-hart at icann.org 2.99% | 2 | 1.20% | 12784 | bfausett at internet.law.pro 2.99% | 2 | 0.93% | 9896 | lists at privaterra.info 1.49% | 1 | 0.98% | 10403 | omar at kaminski.adv.br 1.49% | 1 | 0.94% | 10041 | info at internautabrasil.org 1.49% | 1 | 0.91% | 9656 | dominik.filipp at dsoft.sk 1.49% | 1 | 0.81% | 8612 | dpefeva at isoc.bg 1.49% | 1 | 0.81% | 8581 | veronicac at diplomacy.edu 1.49% | 1 | 0.75% | 8004 | brenbe at consumer.org 1.49% | 1 | 0.69% | 7381 | vb at bertola.eu 1.49% | 1 | 0.68% | 7240 | sylvia at prontocl.com.br 1.49% | 1 | 0.68% | 7195 | narten at us.ibm.com 1.49% | 1 | 0.61% | 6541 | shearman at victoria.tc.ca 1.49% | 1 | 0.60% | 6389 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 1.49% | 1 | 0.51% | 5424 | evan at telly.org --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 67 |100.00% | 1064468 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [ga] VeriSign Registry Service Proposal
by Bashar Al-Abdulhadi June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

Chuck, Can you please explain what does two-character 2nd-level domains on .com and .net ? i thought all two letters/characters were available for registration and already been allocated to their respective owners? Best Regards, Bashar Al-Abdulhadi CEO, KuwaitNET.net Gomes, Chuck wrote, On 6/26/2008 10:54 AM: > It is for single and two-character 2nd-level domain names for .com and > .net. > > Chuck > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 PM >> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org; Gomes, Chuck; >> na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> Cc: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov; >> ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov >> Subject: Re: [ga] VeriSign Registry Service Proposal >> >> Danny, Chuck and all, >> >> Thank you Danny for making us all aware of this. >> >> Chuck, thank you for making us as aware as you possibly >> could regarding this proposal. Is this a TLD or a Domain >> Name? I believe you meant TLD. In any event, our INEGroup >> members will be very interested I am sure to review this >> proposal very closely and shall relay their remarks to me >> which I shall share as broadly as possible to ICANN staff, >> Bod and other constituency groups within the GNSO. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>> Sent: Jun 25, 2008 6:33 PM >>> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >>> Subject: [ga] VeriSign Registry Service Proposal >>> >>> >>> >>>>> CHUCK GOMES: In the interest of transparency and >>>>> >> disclosing my interests, I would like to inform you that >> VeriSign has submitted a registry service proposal for the >> allocation of single and two-character domain names. There >> aren't very many two-character domain names available, by the >> way, one. >> >>> So, unfortunately, until it's posted it is not appropriate >>> >> for me to discuss the details. I can tell you that I believe >> that we incorporated a lot of the issues that were >> recommended in the comments with regard to ICANN's paper and >> that we think it has excellent benefit for the community. >> >>> And in fairness to ICANN staff so that we submitted it late >>> >> leading up to these meeting and at a very difficult time for >> them to respond -- although we have had some interaction, so >> I don't want this to come across as a criticism to ICANN >> staff that it hasn't been posted. >> >>> If per chance -- and I don't know whether this will happen >>> >> or not -- it is posted this week, we will be happy to talk >> about it and receive comments from people. >> >>> https://par.icann.org/files/paris/Paris-GNSO-22JUN08am.txt >>> >>> >>> >>> >> 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 >> >> > > >

2 1

user_s summit 2009 and icann committment to be user oriented
by Annette Muehlberg June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

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

9 8

ICANN Board Resolutions, pt. 1
by Wendy Seltzer June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The ICANN Board is meeting now, <http://par.icann.org/en/node/64>, with a live feed from the scribes available at <http://ses1.penn.icannmeeting.org/iframe.html> We've just heard a resolution adopting the GNSO's policy recommendations on new gTLDs, <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm>, in connection with which I raised ALAC's concerns about the "morality and public order" and "community support" objections. There is still a great deal of implementation work to be done, and ALAC's continued input can help to keep those objection criteria narrow. The At-Large Summit will be discussed at the end of the meeting, in "Other Business." I've gotten some detail from the Summit Working Group to add to that discussion. Thanks! - --Wendy [Agenda] 1) Approval of Minutes from 29 May 2008 (preliminary report is located at http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-29may08.htm 2) New gTLD Policy and Implementation (possible Action) 3) IDNC / IDN Fast-track (possible action) 4) Domain name tasting - support vote on GNSO motion (possible action) 5) BFC’s Recommendations regarding ICANN Budget and Operational Plan for 2008-2009 (possible action) 6) Registrar Accreditation Agreement (status update) 7) PIR DNSSEC Registry Services Proposal (possible action) 8) Review of the Board - Ratification of Executive Committee’s Approval of third-party selected by the BGC to conduct the Review (possible action) 9) BGC Recommendations Regarding RSSAC Working Group Charter (possible action) 10) Bylaws Mandated and other Structural Reviews Update 11) GNSO Improvements - support vote on BGC Report (possible action) 12) GNSO Improvements Implementation Recommendations Update (possible action) 13) Receipt of Report of President’s Strategy Committee Consultation (possible action) 14) Receipt of Reports from Other Board Committees, Compensation, et. Al. (possible actions) 15) Selection of Mexico City for ICANN Meeting Agreement Update (possible action) 16) Review of Paris Meeting Structure 17) Board Response to Discussions arising from Paris Meeting 18) Other Business - -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy(a)seltzer.org Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIY7GRuuui10VsrVERApVHAJ4i6XZ7XDI58yWOgcOkB6OxXsR1sACfV7cW RkkF8VhOsuUhYTio6x9Ab2A= =ogmg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Re: [At-Large] Public Forum Running Order, topics and remote participation link
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

Nick and all, I know you mean well here, but this remote access method is quite poor as there is no avaliability for real time interaction as could have been made avaliable had ICANN attempted to contact either Turner Broadcasting or C-Span. So to call this remote participation in todays technology capability is far from accurate. -----Original Message----- >From: Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart(a)icann.org> >Sent: Jun 25, 2008 2:26 AM >To: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: [At-Large] Public Forum Running Order, topics, and remote participation link > >Dear All: > >In case it is helpful, here is a bit more information about the Public Forum >of the ICANN Paris meeting a bit later today. > >Those who are not with us in Paris may participate remotely; full details >are at: http://par.icann.org/en/wed25jun/public-forum > >The forum has been structured to provide short windows of structured time >for individual topics, as in the running order below. The poll you will find >on the agenda page listed above was used to help ensure that the most >important subjects to the community were included. > >Since it is a discussion, the times will not be exact but there will be a >proactive ending of discussion on a particular topic if it overruns. > >The named staff member assigned to lead that topic will provide a discussion >slide for that topic. After a brief summary of relevant points related to >the subject, the community will them be invited to ask questions. Those >questions will be directed to the relevant person, whether staff, Board, SO >or AC member, or community member. > >Public Forum Running Order >PLEASE NOTE: Times below are close estimates. > >4pm PUBLIC FORUM OPENS >4:00 4:15 EXPLANATION OF FORUM APPROACH (Kieren McCarthy) >DEMONSTRATION OF SCRIBE TEXT FEED (Kieren McCarthy) >EXPLANATION OF EDITED MEETING VIDEOS PLUS ICANN STAFF DOTSUB VIDEO >EXPLANATION OF IPV6 WIRELESS CHANNEL (Kieren McCarthy | Steven Conte) >4:15 4:20 STRATEGIC PLAN (Patrick Sharry) >4:20 4:25 IPv6 (Barbara Roseman / Leo Vegoda) >4:25 4:30 OMBUDSMAN (Frank Fowlie) >4:30 4:40 INDEPENDENT REVIEWS (Denise Michel / Patrick Sharry) >4:40 4:50 IDN FAST TRACK (Tina Dam) >4:50 5:00 IDNs (Tina Dam) >5:00 5:10 RAA / PROTECTION OF REGISTRANTS (Kurt Pritz) >5:10 5:20 GNSO IMPROVEMENTS (Denise Michel) >5:20 5:30 OTHER SUBJECTS (Kieren McCarthy) > >5:30 6:00 BREAK FOR PEOPLE TO GET READY FOR GALA > >6:00 6:30 IMPROVING INSTITUTIONAL CONFIDENCE (JPA CONSULTATION) >(Paul Levins) >6:30 7:00 NEW gTLDs (Karla Valente) > >-- >Regards, > >Nick Ashton-Hart >Director for At-Large >Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) >Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 >USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 >Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 >Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 >email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org >Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: >nashtonhart >Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > 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] VeriSign Registry Service Proposal
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

Danny, Chuck and all, Thank you Danny for making us all aware of this. Chuck, thank you for making us as aware as you possibly could regarding this proposal. Is this a TLD or a Domain Name? I believe you meant TLD. In any event, our INEGroup members will be very interested I am sure to review this proposal very closely and shall relay their remarks to me which I shall share as broadly as possible to ICANN staff, Bod and other constituency groups within the GNSO. -----Original Message----- >From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >Sent: Jun 25, 2008 6:33 PM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >Subject: [ga] VeriSign Registry Service Proposal > > >>>CHUCK GOMES: In the interest of transparency and disclosing my interests, I would like to inform you that VeriSign has submitted a registry service proposal for the allocation of single and two-character domain names. There aren't very many two-character domain names available, by the way, one. > So, unfortunately, until it's posted it is not appropriate for me to discuss the details. I can tell you that I believe that we incorporated a lot of the issues that were recommended in the comments with regard to ICANN's paper and that we think it has excellent benefit for the community. > And in fairness to ICANN staff so that we submitted it late leading up to these meeting and at a very difficult time for them to respond -- although we have had some interaction, so I don't want this to come across as a criticism to ICANN staff that it hasn't been posted. > If per chance -- and I don't know whether this will happen or not -- it is posted this week, we will be happy to talk about it and receive comments from people. > >https://par.icann.org/files/paris/Paris-GNSO-22JUN08am.txt > > > 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

Regarding New GTLD's: RIAA "ask" for ACTA: Online Infringring Activites
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

All, I believe it would be wise to read the following closely and consider where the IPC and in particular the RIAA is regarding the potential USE of new GTLD's and IDN's. http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=190 RIAA Suggestions for content of ACTA These are the substantive suggestions for provisions of the ACTA that the RIAA sent to the USTR on March 17, 2008. [snip] J. Online Infringing Activities Parties shall: 1. Provide exclusive rights under copyright to unambiguously cover Internet use. 2. Establish appropriate rules regarding liability of service/content providers: (a) Establishing primary liability where a party is involved in direct infringement; and ensure the application of principles of secondary liability, including contributory liability and vicarious civil liability, as well as criminal liability and abetting if appropriate. (b) Establishing liability for actions which, taken as a whole, encourage infringement by third parties, in particular with respect to products, components and/or services whose predominant application is the facilitation of infringement. 3. Provide remedies and injunctive relief against any entity that: (a) Creates or otherwise maintains directories of infringing materials; (b) Provides "deeplinks" to infringing files; (c) Commits any act, practice or service that has little or no purpose or effect other than to facilitate infringement, or that intentionally induces others to infringe (specifically allowing proof of "intent" by reference to objective standards--i.e. a reasonable person would surmise such an intent); 4. Require internet service providers and other intermediaries to employ readily available measures to inhibit infringement in instances where both legitimate and illegitimate uses were facilitated by their services, including filtering out infringing materials, provided that such measures are not unduly burdensome and do not materially affect the cost or efficiency of delivering legitimate services; 5. Require Internet service providers or other intermediaries to restrict or terminate access to their systems with respect to repeat infringers. 6. Establish liability against internet service providers who, upon receiving notices of infringement from content provides via eÂmail, or by telephone in cases of pre-release materials or in other exigent circumstances, fail to remove the infringing content, or access to such content, in an expeditious manner, and in no case more than 24 hours; or Provide that, in the absence of proof to the contrary, an internet service provider shall be considered as knowing that the content it stores is infringing or illegal, and thus subject to liability for copyright infringement, after receiving notification from the right holder or its representative, normally in writing, including by email or by telephone in the case of pre-release materials or in other exigent circumstances. 7. Establish, adequately fund and provide training for a computer crimes investigatory unit. 8. Provide injunctive relief against intermediaries whose services are used for infringing activities regardless of whether damages are available. 9. Establish policies against the use of government networks and computers, as well as those networks and computers of companies that have government contracts, to prevent the use of such computers and networks for the transmission of infringing materials, including a ban on the installation of p2p applications except, and to the extent to which, some particular government use requires such installation. 10. Consideration to be given to the following: possible rules on data retention, the right to information giving right holders access to data held by ISPs in the preparation and course of proceedings including in civil proceedings, and availability of complete and accurate WHOIS data. 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

GNSO Improvements
by Alan Greenberg June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

The Board has approved the BGC report on GNSO restructuring with the exception of Council structure. It is creating a working group and the structure of this group has been tightly specified by the Board IT IS RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD ENDORSES THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE'S GNSO REVIEW WORKING GROUP, OTHER THAN ON GNSO COUNCIL RESTRUCTURING, AND REQUESTS THAT THE GNSO CONVENE A SMALL WORKING GROUP ON COUNCIL RESTRUCTURING, INCLUDING ONE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CURRENT NOMCOM APPOINTEES, ONE MEMBER FROM EACH CONSTITUENCY, AND ONE MEMBER FROM EACH LIAISON-APPOINTING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, IF THAT ADVISORY COMMITTEE SO DESIRES, AND THAT THIS GROUP SHOULD REACH CONSENSUS AND SUBMIT A CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATION ON COUNCIL RESTRUCTURING BY NO LATER THAN JULY 25, 2008, FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE ICANN BOARD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT NO LATER THAN THE BOARD'S MEETING IN AUGUST 2008. That gives the ALAC a seat on this working group. I don't know exactly how quickly it will form, but since it must report in less than a month, I expect it to be very soon, and I think it important that we be there from Day-one. I have asked that the ALAC support my being on this working group. My major goal will be to ensure that regardless of the ultimate structure, that the users and not only registrants will have a place in the Non-commercial Stakeholders group. Further refinements we can discuss over the next week. I do note that it will be an interesting challenge for us to come up with a way to create such a User Constituency, but we will face that once we have the opportunity. Alan

3 2

[Fwd: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Direct From ICANN Paris Meeting: Surprise! TheMoney is What Matters!]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

All, FYI... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Direct From ICANN Paris Meeting: Surprise! TheMoney is What Matters! Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:53:48 -0700 From: privacy(a)vortex.com Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy(a)vortex.com> To: privacy-list(a)vortex.com Direct From ICANN Paris Meeting: Surprise! The Money is What Matters! http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000394.html Greetings. Since my posting yesterday ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000393.html ) expressing strong distaste for ICANN's plans to vastly expand the global top-level domain (gTLD) naming system, I've received some interesting analysis and reports from the current Paris ICANN meeting itself. They boil down to one inescapable and extremely unfortunate fact. ICANN has seemingly become dangerously beholden to moneyed interests, and pretty much everyone else now gets short shrift -- to the detriment of the Internet and its users at large. I don't even really blame ICANN's people and participants for this per se -- structural problems with ICANN, some reaching back to its essentially ad hoc creation in the first place (and arguably to the death of Internet pioneer Jon Postel) have essentially guaranteed this state of affairs. While there do appear to be attendees at the Paris meeting who are concerned broadly about DNS stability under the new ICANN plan, the vast bulk of attendees see the upcoming gTLD gold rush as yet another way to line their pockets with greenbacks and euros -- the vast majority of attendees are apparently registrars and registries (and their minions) -- they know which side their bread is buttered on. Priorities at the meeting were reportedly set in the ICANN version of the Twilight Zone. While long-winded (and palpably boring) monologues restating existing positions on squeezing money out of new gLTDs took most of an afternoon, truly important issues like IPv6 reportedly got barely five minutes. One correspondent expressed to me his belief that the complicated (and still incomplete in key respects) ICANN procedures would likely keep us from being flooded with millions of new gTLDs overnight -- but implied (and I agree with this part completely) that voluminous and expensive litigation by particularly aggressive and militant applicants could result in literally any outcomes, however bizarre and disruptive to the Internet and its users -- and the world at large -- those outcomes may be. I would add that this particular correspondent took a much more upbeat stance in a public posting on a major mailing list today -- leaving out most of the strong misgivings and concerns that they expressed to me in private e-mail. I don't care to speculate on the reasons for this discrepancy. I was also blamed indirectly for the problem. Participants in Paris who bemoaned the current state of affairs regarding ICANN apparently expressed some exasperation that interested parties (such as myself) -- who are concerned about the truly important Interent issues -- haven't actively participated in the ICANN process, attended the meetings, and otherwise tried to alter the existing ICANN trajectory into a sensible course. Outside of the fact that many persons -- including me -- don't have the resources to fly around the world to frequently exotic ICANN meeting locales (at this stage, paying for gas just to get around L.A. is a concern), there is another key factor at work. With truly the greatest of respect for ICANN's hard-working people, I still would suggest that many observers of ICANN feel that its structural processes are broken in ways that cannot be significantly influenced by persons with contrarian views vs. ICANN's existing modus operandi. Many of us believe that a dramatic change in "Internet governance" is long overdue, and that this cannot be accomplished within the existing structure of ICANN, despite ICANN's best efforts. Such a belief does not engender an obvious enthusiasm for spinning wheels and fighting battles whose outcomes are usually predetermined. However, I do have a few ideas for useful new gTLDs. How about: dot-shameful dot-ripoff dot-greed dot -- oh, you get the idea. When the most accurate way to predict the outcome of controversial Internet technical issues is to employ the maxim "Follow the Money!" -- well, to call it a sad state of affairs is a supreme understatement. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein lauren(a)vortex.com or lauren(a)pfir.org Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 http://www.pfir.org/lauren Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com _______________________________________________ privacy mailing list http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy 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

[Fwd: IGC Membership list]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 26, 2008

June 26, 2008

All, FYI -------- Original Message -------- Subject: IGC Membership list Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:24:06 +0530 From: "Parminder Jeet Singh" <parmindersingh(a)itforchange.net> To: <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> Dear IGC List Participant, We are preparing a list of members of the Internet Governance Caucus as per its charter (http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html ). The charter defines members as individuals, acting in personal capacity, who subscribe to the charter of the caucus. We request you to go through the charter and if you are willing to subscribe to it, please indicate so in reply to this email. You are requested to reply within 3 weeks (end of day July 17th, 2008) of receiving this email to get your name in the IGC members list. The members list generated at the end of 3 weeks, seen together with the condition that the member need to be subscribed to the IGC email list for 2 months prior to that date, will be used to prepare the voting list for voting for our new co-coordinator. The members list of course will remain open for any new subscription, at all times. Apart from giving your full name, you may, if you so desire, provide any affiliations etc, to help us maintain a complete list of IGC members along with some basic information about them. Thanks, and best regards. Parminder Parminder Jeet Singh Co-coordinator, IGC 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