I agree with Wendy. Make no mistake about this, the opposition to the .xxx TLD is very much related to the larger effort to regulate content. ICANN should not show favour in any way to this campaign but stick to its core competence. Furthermore, my reflexive libertarian streak respecting what I read or view has determined that I am unalterably opposed to any attempt by ICANN to regulate content. For as a consenting adult, it is simply none of anybodys business what I deem useful content for my own use, much less a global multistakeholder organization! I am yet willing to concede that we have a duty of care to protect the young and probably, the weak-minded. But not even these should be considered as ICANNs responsibility. Carlton [Spanish Version] Concuerdo con Wendy. No haga error acerca de esto, la oposición al .xxx TLD es tanto relacionado al esfuerzo más grande regular el contenido. ICANN no debe mostrar el favor en ninguna manera a esta campaña pero al palo a su competencia del centro. Además, mi rayo libertario reflexiva que respeta lo que leí o veo ha determinado que soy opuesto inalterablemente a cualquier tentativa por ICANN para regular el contenido. ¡Para como una persona de edad para consentir, es simplemente ninguno de cualquiera el negocio lo que creo útil contenido para mi propio uso, mucho menos una organización "global de multistakeholder"! Soy mas dispuesto a conceder que tenemos un deber del cuidado para proteger a los jóvenes y probablemente, el débil tiene inconveniente en. Pero ni eso debe ser considerado como responsabilidad de ICANN. Carlton -----Original Message----- From: lac-als-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-als-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of At Large Advisory Committee Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:40 AM To: Vittorio Bertola Cc: 'Interim ALAC' Subject: Re: [LAC-ALS] [ALAC] .xxx ICANN should not be in the business of evaluating strings, period. It should publish technical criteria and minimally evaluate whether a registry fulfills those. Some trademark holders will argue against new TLDs, but then they'd also argue against learning new languages, lest they have to "police" their marks in those too. --Wendy At 04:16 AM 1/30/2007, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Just pushing the issue again - if we want to be heard on this, we need
to come up with a statement in a not too long timeframe, definitely
before Lisbon.
Specifically:
Bret Fausett ha scritto:
On the money printing machine argument, this is an argument in favor of no
new generic TLDs at all. I don't see it as unique to .XXX.
No, the point is that if you had a TLD that is useful to someone (as any
other TLD that was created, basically), then defensive registrations
would be a price that we collectively have to pay to get more names
available out there. But if the TLD is not wanted by its own community
(and it seems unlikely that adult webmasters are actually going to move
into it, just to be filtered out more easily), then what you're left
with is a TLD that more or less only contains defensive registrations
and pay-per-click sites, and that is a nonsense to me.
OTOH, I think that defensive registrations are a silly method to protect
one's brand, as it doesn't scale, and moreover it helps create scarcity
of good names - so it's time that ICANN discourages it and ensures that
there are effective methods to act ex post, rather than being concerned
about how to help it.
--
vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <--------
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org _______________________________________________ LAC-ALS mailing list LAC-ALS@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-als_atlarge-lists.icann. org