- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Fw: EU Personal Data Protection Framework
by Carlton Samuels Dec. 7, 2011

Dec. 7, 2011

Here's some grist for the mill. These might be useful as part of the knowledge acquisition process as we evaluate the draft WHOIS Review Report and its implications, It's much easier to digest from here than the originals but if you have a mind to, those can be served up from the relevant EU website. http://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/2011/12/articles/european-commission-draft… - Carlton a/v Chair, At-Large WHOIS WG ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

2 1

Fwd: Censorship Attempts in India
by Carlton Samuels Dec. 6, 2011

Dec. 6, 2011

FWIW, my position is unambiguous and immutable; I denounce and condemn all attempts at censorship, howsoever designed or orchestrated. Here are some excerpts from a thread I wrote elsewhere in context.... - Carlton ============================== ....We must reject any and all 'star chamber' procedures in this regard as inimical to the public interest. Here is one moment where so-called ' sunshine laws' should apply in spades. For in matters of conscience [or cant!], light is and remains the best disinfectant...... ....I am long socialized to notice and understand the hypocrisy that sometimes get cloaked a s good governance in our societies. So I am unanimous that the ALAC ought not to be witting conspirators for hypocrites. Reflect on the many statements of condemnation of the Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, Cubans, and assorted 'enemies of the people and democracy' for their unpalatable impulse to censorship and thought control from 'western' governments, quondam interests and spokespersons. The fact is the official impulses to censor, to drop the veil secrecy and to basic thought control is not unique to those governments. Recall, for example, how easy it was for the British Prime Minister to suggest censorship and access limitations to Twitter in the recent London riots! Another example, think about the many ways pressure was brought to bear on Wikileaks to heel! The Wikileaks incident saw an immediate conflation of interests to suppress information flows. For example, in its revelations about Jamaica, officialdom was embarrassed by what was told in casual conversations to 'public affair officers' in the US Embassy in KIN. And it is clear that the US State Dept was embarrassed more so on the methods employed for acquiring information; really a concern that the uninitiated would realize how much of 'scuttlebut' and 'verandah talk' constituted 'intelligence'. We should insist that objection to strings finger not just the target but the objector in an open way. Let us know the courage of their convictions. And leave it to each and every one of us to make our own determination as to motive. Trust....but verify. Let them do it in the light of day. - Carlton > >>

2 1

WHOIS Policy Review Team publishes its Draft Report and Recommendations for public comments
by Omar Kaminski Dec. 6, 2011

Dec. 6, 2011

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-05dec11-en.htm Regards, Omar

1 0

Anti-Piracy Group Blackmails ISPs to Censor The Pirate Bay
by Rudi Vansnick Dec. 6, 2011

Dec. 6, 2011

Belgian organisation requested blocking and filtering internet !!! After a court ordered two of the largest Belgian Internet service providers to prevent their users accessing The Pirate Bay, the local anti-piracy outfit is now urging other ISPs to do the same. Internet providers who refuse to give in to this request within 10 days will be taken to court, a threatening letter explains. The blackmailing tactic seems to have worked, as one of the smaller ISPs has already disabled access to The Pirate Bay. Late September the Antwerp Court of Appeal ordered Belgian ISPs Belgacom and Telenet to initiate DNS blockades of 11 domains connected to The Pirate Bay. After a court ordered two of the largest Belgian Internet service providers to prevent their users accessing The Pirate Bay, the local anti-piracy outfit is now urging other ISPs to do the same. Internet providers who refuse to give in to this request within 10 days will be taken to court, a threatening letter explains. The blackmailing tactic seems to have worked, as one of the smaller ISPs has already disabled access to The Pirate Bay. Late September the Antwerp Court of Appeal ordered Belgian ISPs Belgacom and Telenet to initiate DNS blockades of 11 domains connected to The Pirate Bay. The Belgian Anti-Piracy Federation (BAF) applauded the verdict, which they see as a landmark decision opening the door to further censorship attempts. And indeed, without hesitation the group is putting the verdict to work in their favor. NURPA, a Belgian advocacy group which promotes and protects the digital rights of citizens, has learned that BAF has sent a threatening letter to various Belgian ISPs. The group has managed to obtain a copy which they published on their site today. In the letter, BAF mentions the recent verdict against the two Belgian Internet providers, which they say confirms The Pirate Bay is responsible for copyright infringement on a massive scale. To extend the ruling, the anti-piracy group is demanding that other ISPs also begin banning the site’s domains. “To ensure an optimal effect, this measure should be implemented by all Internet service providers, not just by Belgacom and Telenet,” the anti-piracy group writes. The ISPs have ten days to comply, BAF adds, or else the group will take them to court. “Failing a satisfactory response from you within the time limit, the BAF will begin legal proceedings against you,” BAF threatens. Full article on https://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-group-blackmails-isps-to-censor-the-pi… Rudi Vansnick President - CEO ——————————————— Internet Society Belgium ————————————————— President - CEO Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16 rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32 Dendermondesteenweg 143 B-9070 Destelbergen BELGIUM www.internetsociety.be "The Internet is for everyone" ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

3 2

Fwd: [governance] Sibal demands pre-censorship of user-uploaded content
by Pranesh Prakash Dec. 6, 2011

Dec. 6, 2011

This would be of interest to people on this list as well. The Minister (who is an experienced Supreme Court lawyer) just held a press conference an hour ago to justify the below report, saying he is all for freedom of speech, but that there is content online that no one in a democracy won't find objectionable. This is content that he cannot share with the general populace because it is so objectionable that it should not be shown on TV or published in print. - Pranesh -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [governance] Sibal demands pre-censorship of user-uploaded content Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 10:32:28 +0530 From: Pranesh Prakash <pranesh(a)cis-india.org> Reply-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org,Pranesh Prakash <pranesh(a)cis-india.org> Organization: Centre for Internet and Society To: Internet Governance Caucus List <governance(a)lists.cpsr.org>, india-gii(a)lists.cpsr.org In a moment of divine inspiration, the Indian Minister for Communications and Information Technology asks Facebook, Google, Yahoo and Microsoft to pre-censor user-uploaded content. // Pranesh From the New York Times, which broke the story: <http://goo.gl/BXQHY> DECEMBER 5, 2011, 6:33 AM India Asks Google, Facebook to Screen User Content By HEATHER TIMMONS The Indian government has asked Internet companies and social media sites like Facebook to prescreen user content from India and to remove disparaging, inflammatory or defamatory content before it goes online, three executives in the information technology industry say. Top officials from the Indian units of Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Facebook are meeting with Kapil Sibal, India’s acting telecommunications minister, on Monday afternoon to discuss the issue, say two executives of Internet companies. The executives asked not to be identified because they are not authorized to speak to the media on the issue. Mr. Sibal’s office confirmed that he would meet with Internet service providers Monday but did not provide more information about the content of the meeting. About six weeks ago, Mr. Sibal called legal representatives from the top Internet service providers and Facebook into his New Delhi office, said one of the executives who was briefed on the meeting. At the meeting, Mr. Sibal showed attendees a Facebook page that maligned the Congress Party’s president, Sonia Gandhi. “This is unacceptable,” he told attendees, the executive said, and he asked them to find a way to monitor what is posted on their sites. In the second meeting with the same executives in late November, Mr. Sibal told them that he expected them to use human beings to screen content, not technology, the executive said. The three executives said Mr. Sibal has told these companies that he expects them to set up a proactive prescreening system, with staffers looking for objectionable content and deleting it before it is posted. The executives said representatives from these companies will tell Mr. Sibal at the meeting on Monday that his demand is impossible, given the volume of user-generated content coming from India, and that they cannot be responsible for determining what is and isn’t defamatory or disparaging. “If there’s a law and there’s a court order, we can follow up on it,” said an executive from one of the companies attending the meeting. But these companies can’t be in the business of deciding what is and isn’t legal to post, he said. Yahoo, Facebook and Microsoft did not respond immediately to calls for comment, and a Google spokeswoman said the company had no comment on the issue. Facebook said earlier this year it has more than 25 million users in India. Google has over 100 million Internet users in India. The demand is the Indian government’s latest attempt to monitor and control electronic information. In April, the ministry issued rules demanding Internet service providers delete information posted on Web sites that officials or private citizens deemed disparaging or harassing. Last year, the government battled with Blackberry’s manufacturer, Research In Motion, threatening to shut the company’s service off in India if it did not allow government officials greater access to users’ messages. The Indian government also plans to set up its own unit to monitor information posted on Web sites and social media sites, executives said, which will report to Gulshan Rai, the director general of India’s cyber-security monitor. A man who answered the phone in Mr. Rai’s office said he did not talk to the press and hung up when a reporter asked for a press contact. Some Indian cities like Mumbai have already set up special units to monitor Internet sites like Facebook and Orkut, the social networking site operated by Google, for content considered disparaging or obscene. India has made nearly 70 requests to Google to remove content between January and June of this year, one of the highest request rates of any country though less than the United States’s 92 and Brazil’s 224, according to Google’s transparency report. Vikas Bajaj contributed reporting from Mumbai. -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283

2 1

Webcast: New gTLDs: Help shape the future of Internet? Briefing Session - Wed 12/7 0100 UTC
by Joly MacFie Dec. 5, 2011

Dec. 5, 2011

On Wednesday December 7 2011 the Internet Society Webcasting Channel will carry live a session from ISOC Hong Kong: *New gTLDs: Help shape the future of Internet? Briefing Session <http://bit.ly/isochk-newgtlds> . *A panel of experts will tackle topics such as: - What is New gTLDs Program? - Who can apply? - The Application and Approval Process of New gTLDs - The Impacts and Opportunities of new gTLDs *What*: New gTLDs: Help shape the future of Internet? Briefing Session *Where*: InnoCentre. Kowloon, HK *When*: Wednesday Dec 7 2011 9am – 1pm HKT | 0100-0500 UTC | 8pm-Midnight EST (Tuesday) *Webcast*: http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters *Twitter*: #newgtlds <https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23newgtlds>, @isochk<https://twitter.com/#!/search/isochk> *Info*: http://bit.ly/isochk-newgtlds <http://bit.ly/isochk-newgtlds> -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - <http://bit.ly/isochk-newgtlds>http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 0

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten Dec. 2, 2011

Dec. 2, 2011

Total of 50 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Dec 2 00:53:03 EST 2011 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 24.00% | 12 | 20.56% | 65942 | johnl at iecc.com 18.00% | 9 | 21.26% | 68185 | salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com 12.00% | 6 | 11.91% | 38195 | karl at cavebear.com 8.00% | 4 | 8.72% | 27957 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 6.00% | 3 | 6.47% | 20752 | jstyre at jstyre.com 6.00% | 3 | 6.08% | 19497 | icann-list at sorehands.com 6.00% | 3 | 5.62% | 18014 | dogwallah at gmail.com 4.00% | 2 | 4.48% | 14383 | cdel at firsthand.net 4.00% | 2 | 3.50% | 11239 | lutz at iks-jena.de 4.00% | 2 | 3.40% | 10921 | jaap at nlnetlabs.nl 2.00% | 1 | 2.23% | 7163 | michele at blacknight.ie 2.00% | 1 | 2.07% | 6643 | narten at us.ibm.com 2.00% | 1 | 1.89% | 6055 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 2.00% | 1 | 1.82% | 5830 | bfausett at internet.law.pro --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 50 |100.00% | 320776 | Total

1 0

Issue Report on Thick Whois
by Alan Greenberg Dec. 1, 2011

Dec. 1, 2011

One of the recommendations of the IRTP-B Policy Development Process (PDP) was for the GNSO to investigate requiring all gTLD Registries to use a "Thick" Whois. With thick Whois, all of the Whois information related to a registration is maintained by the Registry. With "Thin" Whois, the only information maintained by the Registry is the current status of the registration and identification of who the sponsoring Register is; the rest of the information and specifically that related to the Registrant is kept by the Registrar, making Whois a widely distributed database. Currently most Registries use thick Whois, and thick Whois is required for all gTLDs to be created under the new gTLD program. The only Registries that use thin Whois are operated by Verisign, but these of course include .com and .net which constitute the majority of gTLD registrations. In response to the IRTP-B recommendation, the GNSO requested and Issue Report and a preliminary version is now available and has been posted for public comment. Comments on this document will be received until 30 December, 2011. See http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/thick-whois-preliminary-report-21nov…. The report confirms that the issue is within the scope of ICANN and the GNSO and recommends that the GNSO initiate a Policy Development Process on the issue. The primary purpose of this comment period is to ensure that the Issue Report does indeed address all of the relevant aspects of the issue. However, it will likely also be the only formal opportunity for the ALAC to state whether it recommends that a PDP should be initiated or not. I have not yet reviewed the document in sufficient depth to say whether I feel that it is complete, but on an initial review, it looks fine. My personal belief is that the ALAC should strongly support the initiation of a PDP on this issue.

14 55

Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] Issue Report on Thick Whois
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Nov. 28, 2011

Nov. 28, 2011

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net>wrote: > Hi Alan and Christian > > The first requirement for ANY whois database is accuracy and completeness. > The most recent survey showed that only 8% of entries were complete and > correct and less than 50% of the entries actually enabled the researcher to > find a living person. So before anything else, ICANN should do something > about the vast majority of incomplete/inaccurate entries. > > These are interesting statistics Holly. Is there some sort operational audit mechanism that helps to pick these things up or is it largely self regulatory. From the survey, I am assuming that something exists. I agree that it is critical to ensure that the entries are complete and accurate. Next, what the Whois review team is looking at is to recognise the > existence of privacy servers, have some criteria around them and then > accredit them and ensure that, when necessary law enforcement agencies can > have legitimate access (there are many issues within that sentence, but > that's the direction they were going). No need for proxy servers because - > at law - the registrar is the agent - and arguably therefore responsible > for meeting all of the RAA requirements. > > :) > Finally - the advantage of thick whois is that the local laws/protections > etc apply. Before that, however, another of the Whois review team findings > was that, in way too many cases, it is very hard if not impossible for the > uninitiated to even find it. So one suggestion was that ICANN just provide > a portal that can at least get a person to the database. The next issue > then is whether the data is held centrally or locally (thick or thin) - and > there are arguments for both. > > My suggestion - press the Whois review team for their recommendations and > respond accordingly. > > Holly > > >

1 0

US v John Doe 1 & Others [Defendants]
by Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Nov. 28, 2011

Nov. 28, 2011

Dear All, Warm Greetings from Fiji! Trusting that you are all well and in excellent health. There was an interesting blog by Milton Mueller that I read today, see: http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/11/23/4944811.html The Post Indictment Protective Order pursuant to 21 U.S.C issued by the Honorable William H Pauly III United States District Judge Southern District of New York see para 13, page 7 and 8 http://images.spaceref.com/news/2011/ProtectiveOrder.pdf What is of interest in the Order is that it mentions all the RIRs that are served Notice have to comply with the instructions within the Judgment. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell: +679 998 2851

7 25