March 2012 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Fake Renewal Notices Report - Comment period
by Alan Greenberg April 3, 2012

April 3, 2012

I call your attention to the report on Fake Renewal Notices. There is a comment period open until April 20th. http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/fake-renewal-notices-report-21m… Since this is a topic relevant to individual registrants, and since one of the recommendations suggests referring the issue to the ALAC, I believe it is essential that the ALAC issue a comment. I would be happy to draft a comment if so requested. I have opened a Confluence page at https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/gTLD+Fake+Renewal+Notices+Report. Alan

8 9

Working Party Opinions on EU Data Protection Reform Proposals
by Carlton Samuels March 30, 2012

March 30, 2012

The Data Protection Working Party, a committee attached to the European Commission's Directorate for Justice that provides expert opinion on data protection matters has delivered an opinion re the EU data protection reform proposals. The WP endorses most of the reform proposals; things like legal recognition of binding corporate rules, the updated responsibility and accountability requirements, the treatment of data processors vs. data controllers, preventative use of privacy controls. They also recommended further clarification for a few matters; including the right to be forgotten, breach notification process, balancing of rights with processing costs, discretionary power to Data Protection Authorities to impose fines for breaches, etc. See it here: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinio… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten March 30, 2012

March 30, 2012

Total of 18 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Mar 30 00:53:02 EDT 2012 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 44.44% | 8 | 45.80% | 57712 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 11.11% | 2 | 12.40% | 15631 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 11.11% | 2 | 10.86% | 13681 | lutz at iks-jena.de 11.11% | 2 | 8.85% | 11153 | johnl at iecc.com 5.56% | 1 | 6.47% | 8150 | derek at aa419.org 5.56% | 1 | 5.72% | 7212 | narten at us.ibm.com 5.56% | 1 | 4.95% | 6242 | shearman at victoria.tc.ca 5.56% | 1 | 4.94% | 6229 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 18 |100.00% | 126010 | Total

1 0

[U.S] Federal Trade Commission Report on Privacy
by Carlton Samuels March 28, 2012

March 28, 2012

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission released a 112-page report on privacy. The have reiterated the Fair Information Practice Principles as guiding their perspectives and offer these three (3) principles: " - *Privacy by Design*: Build in privacy at every stage of product development; - *Simplified Choice for Businesses and Consumers*: Give consumers the ability to make decisions about their data at a relevant time and context, including through a Do Not Track mechanism, while reducing the burden on businesses of providing unnecessary choices; and - *Greater Transparency*: Make information collection and use practices transparent." The Executive Summary gives a fairly good grounding of the views. If you want more details read the entire document here: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/03/120326privacyreport.pdf -- Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

3 4

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] .com Registry Agreement Renewal - Public comment - ends 26 April 2012
by Carlton Samuels March 28, 2012

March 28, 2012

Quick notes, especially as it impacts the work of the WHOIS WG...and ALAC commitments. First, a declaration. There are always a few 'weasel phrases' lawyers tend to live and practice by, no big deal, IMHO. Moral of the story: take a gut and finger check, going in. Seems it continues to bind the Registrar to implementation of relevant consensus policies that wash the RAA. This gives standing for implementing things originating thru SSAC and other policy formulations hereafter. Very important 'gateway' principle, IMHO. Notably, there are changes to the format and content of the contractually obliged Monthly Report. Much of the new additions seems to zero in on identifying registrar viability in context of identifiable business model and the churn factor for registrations; that might be useful to help track automated registrations intended for fraudulent use, among other things. If you trace the five (5) criteria Contractual Compliance Review employ to determine if renewal should be without prejudice, WHOIS outcomes gets the short straw. Didn't see even a nod to WHOIS Accuracy enforcement here. Concerns building. This one contains provisions for: 1) adopting a new WHOIS protocol if and when it becomes available via the IETF process; this is the SAC051 production 2) Transitioning to the 'thick' WHOIS model, albeit on GNSO time. In *this context*, I'm challenged to understand the implications in the Discussion Draft on Page 9 "*Traffic Data*"? *Something is amiss.* Additional content is now requested for WHOIS matters; report the number of WHOIS queries for that month, segregated by service origination, i.e., Port 43 or Web service. Other significant changes; one in the WHOIS provisioning - public IPv6 transport support - and another for process - the query will return the name of the Registrar consistent with the IANA data. What is *striking* here is that *all* references to *registrant data* - meaning data on the actual person who registered the domain name and is putative owner - seems to have disappeared from the delimited WHOIS dataset referred in Appendix 5. In other words, the provisions of old *Clause 3 of the RAA now in force are 'disappeared'!* I stand to be corrected. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca>wrote: > .com Registry Agreement Renewal > > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm > > Executive Summary > > ICANN is posting today for public comment Verisign's proposed > agreement for renewal of the 2006 .com Registry Agreement between > ICANN and Verisign. This proposal is a result of discussions between > ICANN and VeriSign, and will be considered by the ICANN Board after > public comment. The current agreement will expire on 30 November > 2012. Public comment may be submitted through April 26, 2012 and > viewed at: > http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/com-renewal-27mar12-en.htm > > This summary describes important aspects of the registry agreement > renewal process, the content of the proposed agreement renewal, and > certain background to the proposed agreement. This summary is > accompanied by the "red line" version of the agreement and several > documents that describe and summarize the proposal. Upcoming > agreements due to be renewed in 2012 such as .biz, .info, .name and > .org will follow a similar process. > > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org > ALAC Working Wiki: > https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… >

1 0

Draft ALAC Statement on Conflict of Interest
by Carlton Samuels March 27, 2012

March 27, 2012

Following on a commitment at San Jose, we collectively have prepared and the ALAC intends to vote a statement on Conflict of Interest (CoI) soon. See the drafts here and make your input: https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/At-Large+ICANN+Board+Conf… - Carlton Samuels ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

ICC Policy Statement on Cross- Border Law Enforcement vs Privacy Laws
by Carlton Samuels March 26, 2012

March 26, 2012

The Int'l Chamber of Commerce [ICC] has been mulling over the issues with cross-border law enforcement regarding privacy laws. They have issued a policy statement which reflects the position of participants from 95 companies, organizations and ICC national committees in 25 countries. Here it is: http://www.iccwbo.org/uploadedFiles/Law_enforcement_access_to_company_data_… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

4 5

German views on EU data privacy reform initiative
by Carlton Samuels March 23, 2012

March 23, 2012

The German Data Commissioners just concluded their 83rd Conference. It appears they endorsed the intent of the EU proposals for data privacy reform with a few caveats. Several hot topics came up for discussion; ACTA, surveillance of telecommunications and law enforcement use of internet searches, including monitoring of social networks. They produced a few resolutions on matters of heightened concerns. The text is in German but if you have a mind to read it all, inline Google Translate is quite helpful. http://www.lda.brandenburg.de/sixcms/detail.php?gsid=bb1.c.284560.de&templa… - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Joint EU-US Statement on [privacy] data protection
by Carlton Samuels March 23, 2012

March 23, 2012

Here's a link to the joint EU/US Statement on data protection, an outcome of the recent Safe Harbor Conference. Most of you would know that there are differences between US and EU data privacy legal frameworks and how they are operationalized. The Safe Harbor Conference is an ongoing bilateral initiative to square that circle; at minimum, to ensure 'interoperability' of the regulations and a common enforcement regime. Prior ALAC Statement acknowledged the fact of these kinds of initiatives. Here's a line in the release that you might want to take special note of: "deepen our transatlantic dialogue on *commercial* data privacy issues." [Note: the word in bold is my emphasis.]* . *Um, sure looks like a 'throwaway', doesn't it............ http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/12/192 - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten March 23, 2012

March 23, 2012

Total of 12 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Mar 23 00:53:02 EDT 2012 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 41.67% | 5 | 32.38% | 28211 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 16.67% | 2 | 24.06% | 20963 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 8.33% | 1 | 12.21% | 10637 | raulbauer at gmail.com 8.33% | 1 | 9.16% | 7977 | narten at us.ibm.com 8.33% | 1 | 7.63% | 6646 | sebastien at bachollet.com 8.33% | 1 | 7.31% | 6368 | karl at cavebear.com 8.33% | 1 | 7.24% | 6310 | silvia.vivanco at icann.org --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 12 |100.00% | 87112 | Total

1 0

Data Privacy - Philippines
by Carlton Samuels March 23, 2012

March 23, 2012

The Philippines has just passed into law an EU-style data privacy regime. http://www.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/1218710275!.pdf - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

1 0

NTIA - Legally Enforceable Code of Conduct on Consumer Privacy
by Carlton Samuels March 21, 2012

March 21, 2012

The NTIA [An agency of the U.S. DoC] is seeking comments on the issues that will help it to decide whether the time for enforceable codes of conduct on consumer privacy is now and, if so, what are the procedures required to develop such codes. Here's the notice: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-register-notice/2012/multistakeholder-proce… Its open until March 26, 2012. Maybe we should extract some elements of our WHOIS Statement and adopt them for comments? - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

2 1

Fwd: Seth Reiss Video Clip Promoting Involvement in WHOIS
by Carlton Samuels March 21, 2012

March 21, 2012

This clip is compliments of our NARALO colleague and my friend, Glenn McKnight. cinematographer, director and producer. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= 1. Seth Reiss Video Clip on WHOIS (Glenn McKnight) 2. Seth Reiss Invitation to Join WHOIS Committee (Glenn McKnight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- *Here is Seth Reiss's first video http://youtu.be/Q5HZvjf4uJA * * Seth's short video to invite people to get involved with WHOIS Taskforce http://youtu.be/-wUvbXuWMgA Glenn

1 0

Video of Rod and Steve ICANN 43
by Sébastien Bachollet March 18, 2012

March 18, 2012

Dear Colleagues, http://costarica43.icann.org/ Worth to look from 13 to 14 Steve is talking about LACRALO and AFRALO. All the best Have a look Sébastien Bachollet <mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com> sebastien(a)bachollet.com Member of the Board ICANN.jpg <http://iffor.org/> cid:image002.jpg@01CC6D9A.87E9A810 Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/> http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mobile (France): +33 6 07 66 89 33 Mobile (USA only): +1 (415) 238 2882 Skype: sebastien-bachollet Jabber: <mailto:sbacholl@jabber.org> sbacholl(a)jabber.org "C'est la première fois depuis ma naissance : comme tant d'autres Lunaires, je n'avais encore jamais vu la planète Terre." - Vladimir Pozner - Mal de Lune - 1974

2 1

How much is it to check 1000 Whois entries for reachability?
by Lutz Donnerhacke March 17, 2012

March 17, 2012

Please calculate first and then read. http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/Week-of-Mon-20120312/thread.html -> NORC Study cost I'm really surprised.

2 1

Fwd: [CIVIC] Greater use of ICTs in education encouraged (Barbados)
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro March 16, 2012

March 16, 2012

Dear All, For those of you who are in San Jose, it has been great to meet you all. I would like to share some things we can learn from Barbados, see below: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Yacine Khelladi <yacine(a)yacine.net> Date: Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 9:51 AM Subject: [CIVIC] Greater use of ICTs in education encouraged (Barbados) To: "Caribbean ICT stakeholders Virtual Community (CIVIC)" < civic(a)dgroups.org> Greater use of ICTs in education encouraged http://www.barbadosadvocate.**com/newsitem.asp?more=local&**NewsID=23453<http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/newsitem.asp?more=local&NewsID=23453> 3/16/2012 Transforming education through technology will require emphasis on learning how to create, how to collaborate and how to communicate in education without neglecting the content. That is according to one of the directors of Caribbean Online Academy, Dr. Lora Woodwall, who delivered the featured address at the Ministry of Education’s Barbados Technology in Education conference which opened yesterday morning at the Lloyd Erskine Sandiford Centre. “Information and Communications Technology (ICT) can help to transform education by helping us to create, collaborate and communicate differently and more effectively. However, in order to do this, we need to recognise that a clear vision needs to be communicated, a strategic plan developed and explicated and most importantly, people need to be at the forefront of that change,” said Dr. Woodwall. She stated that educational leaders, educators and students all have a critical role to play in the transformation of education and technology. “The question is not whether technology can transform education, but rather are we willing to make the changes that are necessary? Changes in the way we manage education, changes in the way that we teach, changes in the way that our students learn...” Dr. Woodwall noted that for change to occur in the Caribbean, “We need to inform the powers that be, that it is not our regard, if this is the case, to have a system that is so examination driven but that takes a whole society to say we want a different way of education. That is a huge cultural change and that is going to take awhile to happen but it can happen.” She said that the other way this is possible is to use technology to achieve the same aim. “Barbados is highly regarded in the Caribbean and the wider world for its education system even though that has been largely content driven, that does not mean that you should throw out that whole way of looking at things and adopt a completely new way. I think there is room for combination, so that we can make sure that our students still know the critical content but that we have the critical thinking and research skills that they need,” said Dr. Woodwall. According to her, teachers will also need to work on locating and adapting material to tailor the resources to the needs of Caribbean students. She added that students need to be taught how to effectively search for information online and how to evaluate the resources that they find. Dr. Woodwall stressed that educators are key to the integration of ICTs in the education system and any changes must have their involvement and support. This, she said, would require teachers to have the necessary knowledge and skills and understand the role of technology in teaching and learning. The conference runs for three days and is free to the public. It includes an exhibition displaying various institutions that work with technology, which many primary school students enjoyed viewing yesterday morning. (AR) ________________________ Visit [web site]( http://dgroups.org/groups/**CIVIC<http://dgroups.org/groups/CIVIC>) | [Reply to sender]( mailto: yacine(a)yacine.net ) | Click [here]( mailto:leave.civic@dgroups.org ) to unsubscribe The email is intended only for the recipients. The owners of the Dgroups cannot be held responsible for the contents of the email message. -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851

2 2

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten March 16, 2012

March 16, 2012

Total of 32 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Mar 16 00:53:03 EDT 2012 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 18.75% | 6 | 20.50% | 50994 | franck.martin at gmail.com 12.50% | 4 | 16.78% | 41738 | cdel at firsthand.net 6.25% | 2 | 5.97% | 14845 | avc at namesatwork.com 6.25% | 2 | 5.34% | 13295 | karl at cavebear.com 6.25% | 2 | 5.23% | 13015 | derek at aa419.org 6.25% | 2 | 5.08% | 12639 | lutz at iks-jena.de 6.25% | 2 | 4.66% | 11595 | johnl at iecc.com 3.12% | 1 | 5.14% | 12789 | ocl at gih.com 3.12% | 1 | 4.35% | 10831 | roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com 3.12% | 1 | 3.55% | 8821 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 3.12% | 1 | 3.23% | 8038 | jefsey at jefsey.com 3.12% | 1 | 3.16% | 7857 | narten at us.ibm.com 3.12% | 1 | 2.80% | 6968 | avc at avc.vc 3.12% | 1 | 2.62% | 6518 | michele at blacknight.ie 3.12% | 1 | 2.53% | 6289 | langdonorr at gmail.com 3.12% | 1 | 2.46% | 6121 | staff at atlarge.icann.org 3.12% | 1 | 2.28% | 5681 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 3.12% | 1 | 2.26% | 5622 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 3.12% | 1 | 2.06% | 5129 | wladimirds at gmail.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 32 |100.00% | 248785 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Guidance for Domain Name Orders
by Lutz Donnerhacke March 15, 2012

March 15, 2012

Hi Dave, I'm shocked about you paper: http://tinyurl.com/icann-supports-censorship What the hell is the reason behind drafting such a collection of (at least) misleading forms? Your wording in the preface is completely irrelevant: It will be ignored. The only thing pushed into the brains of law enforcement and politics is the simple message: "ICANN is willing to support all your needs. Fill those forms. No further questions asked." For technical people the paper might be not directly wrong, but it is a political nightmare. By fulfilling your technically motivated desire to automate repeating tasks, you did implement the wrong solution. ICANN has the obligation to protect the Internet by maintaining stable and secure provisioning of basic ressources. This is the main task ICANN has to fulfill due by various contracts, especially the §3 of the Articles of Incorporation as well as §3(b) of the Affirmation of Commitments. Your paper draws the wrong solution, because it ignores this basic principle and opens the road to rank indiviual interests higher than the public interest in a single common Internet. Given the political implications, your paper is a direct violation of §5(b) and §5(c) of the Articles of Incorporation as well as §4 of the Affirmation of Commitments. Please let me quote from the legal document mentioned last: To ensure that its decisions are in the public interest, and not just the interests of a particular set of stakeholders, ICANN commits to perform and publish analyses of the positive and negative effects of its decisions on the public, including any financial impact on the public, and the positive or negative impact (if any) on the systemic security, stability and resiliency of the DNS. Your paper causes a strong impact to the creditability of ICANN. Sadly, Lutz

12 21

(no subject)
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro March 13, 2012

March 13, 2012

Dear Staff, Grateful if you could clarify whether the Schedule<http://costarica43.icann.org/full-schedule>via is the updated version as there is no At Large Improvements Task Force that in one of the programmes and handouts mentions that it is at 5:00pm-7:30pm at the Girasol. The flier (hard copy) says that this starts at 4:00pm which is one hour earlier than what is in the Schedule<http://costarica43.icann.org/full-schedule> . Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851

3 2

Proposed ALAC statement on reserved names for the IOC and Red Cross
by Evan Leibovitch March 12, 2012

March 12, 2012

Hello all, As discussed on the Monday ALAC call, I have done a first draft of a statement on the recent Board and GNSO activity regarding reserved names for the Red Cross and International Olympic Committee. The draft of this statement is located at https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/On+Reserved+Names+for+the… Please read and comment. I will attempt to incorporate any received comments before this statement is presented to ALAC for consideration as advice to be approved during the Costa Rica meeting. Thanks! Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

13 21

Subscribtion ready
by Wladimir March 11, 2012

March 11, 2012

Tnx Enviado desde mi iPhone

1 0

GNSO Pending Projects List
by Alan Greenberg March 10, 2012

March 10, 2012

For those who are interested, you can find the complete list of active GNSO projects (both policy related including, among other things, policy, AC/SO, administrative) at http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/pending-projects-list.pdf.

1 0

Role of ICANN in US/Verisign seizures of .com domains
by Pranesh Prakash March 10, 2012

March 10, 2012

From the easyDNS blog: http://goo.gl/jt3oq ## Verisign seizes .com domain registered via foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities. Written by Mark Jeftovic on February 29, 2012 Yesterday Forbes broke [the news that Canadian Calvin Ayre and partners who operate the Bodog online gambling empire have been indicted in the U.S.][], and in a blog post [Calvin Ayre confirmed that their bodog.com domain had been seized by homeland security][]. As reported in Forbes ([hat tip to The Domains][] for the cite), > According to the six-page indictment filed by Rosenstein, Ayre worked with Philip, Ferguson and Maloney to supervise an illegal gambling business from June 2005 to January 2012 in violation of Maryland law. The indictment focuses on the movement of funds from accounts outside the U.S., in Switzerland, England, Malta, and Canada, and the hiring of media resellers and advertisers to promote Internet gambling. > > “Sports betting is illegal in Maryland, and federal law prohibits bookmakers from flouting that law simply because they are located outside the country,” Rosenstein said in a statement. “Many of the harms that underlie gambling prohibitions are exacerbated when the enterprises operate over the Internet without regulation.” That is a truly scary quote but we'll emphasize that: "The indictment focuses on the movement of funds **outside the U.S.**" and that you can't just "flout US law" by *not being in the US*. What also needs to be understood is that the domain bodog.com was registered to via a non-US Registrar, namely [Vancouver's domainclip][]. ## So Here's Where It Get's Scary… We all know that with some US-based Registrars (\*cough\* Godaddy \*cough\*), all it takes is a badge out of a box of crackerjacks and you have the authority to [fax in a takedown request which has a good shot at being honoured][]. We also know that some non-US registrars, i[t takes a lot more "due process-iness" to get a domain taken down.][] But now, none of that matters, because in this case the State of Maryland simply issued [a federal warrant was issued in the State of Maryland][][1] to .com operator Verisign, (who is headquartered in California) who then duly updated the rootzone for .com with two new NS records for bodog.com which now redirect the domain to the takedown page. This is exactly the scenario we were worried about [when Verisign originally tabled their very troubling takedown proposal][]. Said proposal was quickly retracted, but here we have the same situation playing out anyway. Granted, this was an actual court order, to Verisign – not a "request" from a governmental or "quasi-governmental" agency as originally proposed. But at the end of the day what has happened is that US law (in fact, Maryland state law) as been imposed on a .com domain operating outside the USA, which is the subtext we were very worried about [when we commented on SOPA][]. Even though SOPA is currently in limbo, the reality that US law can now be asserted over all domains registered under .com, .net, org, .biz and maybe .info (Afilias is headquartered in Ireland by operates out of the US). This is no longer a doom-and-gloom theory by some guy in a tin foil hat. It just happened. The ramifications of this are no less than chilling and every single organization branded or operating under .com, .net, .org, .biz etc needs to ask themselves about their vulnerability to the whims of US federal and state lawmakers (not exactly known their cluefulness nor even-handedness, especially with regard to matters of the internet). ## The larger picture: root monopolies and the need to replace ICANN The .com root will never be opened to a truly competitive bidding process. Verisign has pretty well ensconced themselves into the .com and .net roots indefinitely with [built-in price hikes baked into the cake][]. I recall a conversation I once had with Tucows CEO Elliot Noss, back when they still owned Liberty RMS (which ran the .info registry and later sold to Afilias) – he lamented that if the .com registry bidding process were *truly* competitive, you would see a registry operator in there doing it for about $2 per domain. At the time the wholesale cost of a .com domain was $6 and is now $7.85 after their latest *annual increase* which is hard-coded into their contract. I mention this because a truly competitive bidding process for the registry operator job would bring out both cost competition and stewardship competition: players who would table proposals on just how they would respect the rights of all their stakeholders, not to mention operators who may operate outside the United States. **Where the fsck is ICANN in all of this?** ****They are nowhere. They are collecting their fees, pushing their agenda of as many possible new-top-level domains and despite the fact that SOPA, ACTA, PIPA et aim directly at the interests of their core stakeholders, for whom they are supposed to be advocates and stewards. ICANN is conspicuous in their absence from the debate, save for a smug and trite abdication of involvement (i.e. "[ICANN Doesn't Take Down Websites][]") – translation: "This isn't our problem". And therein lies the issue. ***ICANN needs to make this their problem, because it very much is.*** If ICANN isn't going to stand up, and vigorously campaign for **global** stakeholder representation in these matters, than they are not only abdicating any responsibility in the ongoing and escalating crackdown on internet freedom, they are *also* abdicating their right to govern and oversee it. They need to be visible, they need to be loud and they need to come down on the right side of these issues or they need to be replaced. **Of course, the replacement of ICANN will never happen.** At least not by a non-US entity, which means we are once again headed to the unthinkable place that only crackpots and conspiracy theorists think possible: a fractured internet with competing roots. On the bright side, life will go on, and companies like mine will probably become exceedingly wealthy charging every internet user in the world fees to gain and project visibility across all the myriad internet roots that will someday exist because governments will refuse to approach it co-operatively. The only thing that will remain to be seen is whether we'll be deemed "criminals" for doing so. ## Further Reading: - [First They Came For The Filesharing Domains][] - [Verisign Takedown Proposal Very Worrisome][when Verisign originally tabled their very troubling takedown proposal] - [How SOPA Will Destroy The Internet][when we commented on SOPA] - [The Price of Freedom and The Cost of a Domain Name][fax in a takedown request which has a good shot at being honoured] - [The Official easyDNS Takedown Policy][t takes a lot more "due process-iness" to get a domain taken down.] - [Further Ramifications of US Government Domain Takedowns][] ## Footnote [1] I originally was under the impression that the State of Maryland issued the warrant, it has been pointed out to me that this is not the case, the warrant is a federal warrant issued in the State of Maryland. ## Links [the news that Canadian Calvin Ayre and partners who operate the Bodog online gambling empire have been indicted in the U.S.]: http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2012/02/28/feds-indict-former-onlin… [Calvin Ayre confirmed that their bodog.com domain had been seized by homeland security]: http://calvinayre.com/2012/02/28/legal/calvin-ayre-indicted-by-feds-calvin-… [hat tip to The Domains]: http://www.thedomains.com/2012/02/28/feds-not-only-seize-the-domain-name-bo… [Vancouver's domainclip]: http://www.domainclip.com [fax in a takedown request which has a good shot at being honoured]: http://blog.easydns.org/2012/02/17/the-price-of-freedom-and-the-cost-of-a-d… "The price of freedom and the cost of a domain name" [t takes a lot more "due process-iness" to get a domain taken down.]: http://blog.easydns.org/2012/02/21/the-official-easydns-domain-takedown-pol… "The Official easyDNS Domain Takedown Policy" [a federal warrant was issued in the State of Maryland]: http://cdn3.bit2host.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/BodogWebsiteSeizureWarr… [when Verisign originally tabled their very troubling takedown proposal]: http://blog.easydns.org/2011/10/11/verisign-domain-takedown-proposal-very-w… "Verisign domain takedown proposal very worrisome." [when we commented on SOPA]: http://blog.easydns.org/2011/12/22/how-sopa-will-destroy-the-internet/ "How SOPA Will Destroy The Internet" [built-in price hikes baked into the cake]: http://blog.easydns.org/2007/04/16/verisign-raises-fees-on-com-and-net-easy… "Verisign raises fees on .COM and .NET, easyDNS…doesn't" [ICANN Doesn't Take Down Websites]: http://blog.icann.org/2010/12/icann-doesn’t-take-down-websites/ [First They Came For The Filesharing Domains]: http://blog.easydns.org/2010/11/27/first-they-came-for-the-file-sharing-dom… "First they came for the file-sharing domains…" [Further Ramifications of US Government Domain Takedowns]: http://blog2.easydns.org/2012/03/05/the-ramifications-of-us-government-doma… -- Pranesh Prakash · Programme Manager · Centre for Internet and Society PGP: 0x1D5C5F07 · @pranesh_prakash · http://cis-india.org

5 4

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten March 9, 2012

March 9, 2012

Total of 30 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Mar 9 00:53:03 EST 2012 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 20.00% | 6 | 18.43% | 48547 | evan at telly.org 13.33% | 4 | 10.36% | 27296 | avri at acm.org 10.00% | 3 | 9.67% | 25468 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 6.67% | 2 | 7.58% | 19976 | elisabeth.porteneuve at latmos.ipsl.fr 6.67% | 2 | 6.29% | 16557 | jeff.neuman at neustar.us 6.67% | 2 | 5.18% | 13642 | ocl at gih.com 3.33% | 1 | 6.70% | 17644 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 3.33% | 1 | 6.24% | 16426 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 3.33% | 1 | 5.92% | 15596 | pranesh at cis-india.org 3.33% | 1 | 3.70% | 9752 | cw at christopherwilkinson.eu 3.33% | 1 | 3.29% | 8678 | hongxueipr at gmail.com 3.33% | 1 | 3.15% | 8296 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 3.33% | 1 | 2.99% | 7870 | vanda at uol.com.br 3.33% | 1 | 2.75% | 7254 | narten at us.ibm.com 3.33% | 1 | 2.60% | 6856 | jam at jacquelinemorris.com 3.33% | 1 | 2.59% | 6820 | dogwallah at gmail.com 3.33% | 1 | 2.55% | 6720 | karl at cavebear.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 30 |100.00% | 263398 | Total

1 0

IRTP-C Session in CR
by Avri Doria March 7, 2012

March 7, 2012

Hi, The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part C Policy Development Process Working Group of the GNSO (IRTP-C WG) is doing outreach for its meeting in Costa Rica Date: Wed, 14 March 2012 - 08:30 - 10:00 Room: La Paz B " The IRTP-C WG is tasked to consider the following questions and make recommendations to the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council: a) "Change of Control" function, including an investigation of how this function is currently achieved, if there are any applicable models in the country-code name space that can be used as a best practice for the gTLD space, and any associated security concerns. It should also include a review of locking procedures, as described in Reasons for Denial #8 and #9, with an aim to balance legitimate transfer activity and security. b) Whether provisions on time-limiting Form Of Authorization (FOA)s should be implemented to avoid fraudulent transfers out. For example, if a Gaining Registrar sends and receives an FOA back from a transfer contact, but the name is locked, the registrar may hold the FOA pending adjustment to the domain name status, during which time the registrant or other registration information may have changed. c) Whether the process could be streamlined by a requirement that registries use IANA IDs for registrars rather than proprietary Ids. This is an open Working Group meeting and part of the meeting will be dedicated to obtaining community input and feedback on the charter questions under consideration. Agenda Details: See https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/IRTP+Part+C+F2F+Mee… for further details. " This is a 90 minute meeting: - The first hour will be devoted to an open face 2 face meeting of the WG - The last half hour will be a Q&A session. The meeting will have the normal ICANN remote participation capability. While the adobe will be monitored for questions, feel free to ask for the call-in number via the Adobe, if you are remote and want to participate via voice instead of typing. For those traveling to CR - safe journeys all. To others, I hope the Remote Participation works for you. Avri Doria co-chair IRTF-C WG

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Proposed ALAC statement on reserved names for the IOC and Red Cross
by Alan Greenberg March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012

At 05/03/2012 02:46 AM, Hong Xue wrote: >Without attempting to say what is right/wrong/good/bad, it might be > > important to remember that the various Red Cross strings and I think > > the IOC ones (but not quite sure about that) are not trademarks. > > Whether they would be handled by WIPO (or UDRP) procedures, I don't > > know, but they are a different sort of beast. The various Red Cross > > symbols are character strings (as it has been explained to me) are > > not actually "owned" by the International Red Cross Movement but are > > protected in accordance with treaties, by individual laws within > > virtually all countries. Moreover, unlike trademark violation, > > improper use of the symbols and strings are protected in most > > countries by criminal code statute, so improper use is actually a > > criminal offence. > > > > I did not join the ALAC call so am not sure whether the following "legal" >or "factual" basis has been addressed or not. > >It is true that RC or IOC emblems are not trademarks and cannot be >"trademarkable" under the relevant international laws. So UDRP that can >only handle disputes between trademarks (service marks) and domain names is >not available proceeding to ICRC or IOC. BUT, within the new gTLD review >process, both sets of symbols can be protected through "objection based on >legal right", which applies to all the IGO names (and other names). Besides >RC and IOC, GAC, ALAC and Independent Objector can all object to the >pertinent applications and bring them to the dispute resolution process. So >it is indeed questionable whether RC and IOC deserves more protection than >the other IGOs. > >It is true that RC and IOC emblems are both protected under the >international treaties. But Geneva Convention (series) and Nairobi Treaty >on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol are actually not on the same page. >While almost all the countries in the world have joined the Geneva >Conventions and should protect RC and the other three equivalent names, >Nairboi Treaty has only 50 member states (as of the end of 2011) and >contains many exceptions (such as non-commercial use and prior use). It is >doubtful whether ICANN's absolute protection for Olympic signs has gone >beyond the Treaty. Interestingly, USA is still not a member state of >Nairobi Treaty. Existence of an international treaty does not entitle >certain signs holly right. > >The preemptive measure is both limited and ineffective. For example, it >cannot exclude Olympik, etc. > >Hong Thanks Hong, I agree that the two cases are quite different and it is unfortunate that they were lumped together. I think that the Board action (aside from being counter to the bottom up process) was probably not needed. The chances of someone other than these organizations spending $185k to register those exact strings is very low, and even lower that they would survive a challenge. But I guess it was a way of addressing the issue and moving forward. Your last comment is quite true. That was one of the motivations for the changes that the DT has recommended. If we are going to have the restriction, make them effective, and also try to ensure that is someone does apply for a "similar but not identical" string, they know earlier in the game whether it sill be successful - challenges happen quite late in th e process. Interestingly, the situation may not be as clear at the second level, but those discussions have not started. Alan

1 0

Please distribute - Panel on ICTS and SIDS - participate online - March 12, 2012 (2:30pm-4pm eastern standard time)
by Cintra Sooknanan March 4, 2012

March 4, 2012

Of interest Cintra ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dhanaraj Thakur <pureart100-mail(a)yahoo.com> Date: Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 3:55 PM Subject: [Alumni-ngl] Please distribute - Panel on ICTS and SIDS - participate online - March 12, 2012 (2:30pm-4pm eastern standard time) To: alumni-ngl(a)elists.isoc.org Dear all, this might be on interest to some members. take care, Dhanaraj ------------------------------ * * *Invitation to Participate in a Panel Discussion: Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)* We wish to invite you to join us online for a panel discussion on ICTs and SIDS which will take place at the Fifth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development (ICTD2012), Atlanta, USA, *Monday, March 12, 2012 from 2:30pm to 4pm (eastern standard time).* To follow the discussions live and participate online please join us at: *https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/813799999 * The goal of this panel is to examine the various ways in which ICTs can be used to overcome the unique development challenges that are faced by SIDS. The topic will be addressed by panelists from a variety perspectives including: - Christina Higa, Director, Pan-Pacific Education and Communication Experiments by Satellite (PEACESAT), Hawaii, USA - *“Universal Service and Public Service ICT for Development: Pacific Island Experiences.” * - Ilan Kelman, Senior Research Fellow, Center for International Climate and Environmental Research, Oslo, Norway - *"**SIDS and ICTs: Applications for Disaster Risk Reduction, Including Climate Change Adaptation**."* - Dhanaraj Thakur, Lecturer, Department of Government, The University of the West Indies, Jamaica. - *"National ICT Policies in the SIDS Context." * - Elena De Jesus, Associate Sustainable Development Officer, SIDS Unit, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs - "*ICTs and Coordinating Action across SIDS: SIDS Net"* The panel will be chaired by Prof. Gillian Marcelle (Wits Business School, South Africa). Note that there is no cost to participating online. We look forward to your attendance. https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/813799999 ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Alumni-ngl mailing list Alumni-ngl(a)elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/alumni-ngl To unsubscribe: https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/alumni-ngl

2 1

Re: [At-Large] Proposed ALAC statement on reserved names for the IOC and Red Cross
by Alan Greenberg March 4, 2012

March 4, 2012

I will be commenting on the specifics of the statement, but to set the record straight, I have told the DT that to the extent that there have been ALAC comments (and Evan has certainly been one of them), the general feeling was that ICANN should not be extending special protection to these two organizations. Some of the members of the DT have been formally representing their constituencies/SGs. That has not been the case for me and I don't think I have ever represented my participation as representing ALAC except at the times that I gave the above disclaimers. My own participation in the DT has been from a perspective of given that the Board *has* extended special protection, how can we make the details of that protection least-onerous to the community in general, to those organizations, and to ICANN (and I have made it clear to the ALAC Executive Committee and others) that this has been my goal. That is quite close, I think, to the position that Jeff has taken. Alan At 04/03/2012 01:34 PM, you wrote: >Hi Jeff, > >I am not sure I can post to this list, but if I can, I just want to note > > for the record that this statement by Evan is completely contrary to the > > position taken by the ALAC member on the Drafting Team. > > >Having spoken to Alan before writing this, I don't believe that to be the >case. > > - Evan >_______________________________________________ >At-Large mailing list >At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten March 2, 2012

March 2, 2012

Total of 10 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Mar 2 00:53:03 EST 2012 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 30.00% | 3 | 62.86% | 87243 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 10.00% | 1 | 6.91% | 9590 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 10.00% | 1 | 6.20% | 8611 | rgatto at nic.br 10.00% | 1 | 5.57% | 7729 | cintra.sooknanan at gmail.com 10.00% | 1 | 5.14% | 7138 | narten at us.ibm.com 10.00% | 1 | 4.83% | 6706 | heidi.ullrich at icann.org 10.00% | 1 | 4.29% | 5960 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 10.00% | 1 | 4.19% | 5818 | fatimacambronero at gmail.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 10 |100.00% | 138795 | Total

1 0

Dashboard #RALO
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro March 2, 2012

March 2, 2012

Dear All, Warm Greetings from the Pacific! Can someone please confirm whether the RALO Dashboards are updated, that is February, 2012? I know last time I posed the question, LACRALO was the only one that had their dashboard up to date. This is for some "number crunching". Warm Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851

1 0