Karl, you wrote: "well established legal due processes and protections." And in the case of a Russian-mob operated chain of sites that sell vicodin (or a version thereof) all over the world to anyone who will pay, using registrations obtained in the US with false WHOIS data, where exactly is the "well established legal due processes and protections"? No-one's talking about medical marijuana in California. This is about (among other types of drugs), Class IV controlled substances. Note that "The United States is a party to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, designed to establish effective control over international and domestic traffic in narcotics, coca leaf, cocaine, and cannabis. A second treaty, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, which entered into force in 1976, is designed to establish comparable control over stimulants, depressants, and hallucinogens. Congress ratified this treaty in 1980." (http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/1-csa.htm) You also wrote: "ICANN is being used as a private hired gun through which everyone from the trademark industry to "consumer advocates" are trying to create an e-vigilante shortcut" Nice, though rather dated, rhetorical flourish, but I think we are talking about encouraging the contracted-party-dominated ICANN community to abide by and enforce its own policies or contractual provisions on WHOIS data. Once you've looked at the umpteenth one of these types of sites protected by private proxy registration, you get a little bit discouraged. I don't know if the trademark industry is paying ICANN's "hired gun" fee, but I can assure you we "consumer advocates" ain't got the money between us to rent a margarita machine for an afternoon. Beau -----Original Message-----
From: Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> Sent: Dec 14, 2009 6:47 PM To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] [FWD: RE: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Discussion on Domain Names Registered Using Private/Proxy Services / 14.12.09 @ 18:00 UTC]
On 12/14/2009 03:05 PM, James Seng wrote:
Sorry for not able to attend the call (its 2am on my side) but is there a summary of the meeting or transcript available? I am interested in the ALAC position on privacy statement.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Discussion on Domain Names Registered Using Private/Proxy Services / 14.12.09 @ 18:00 UTC From: "Garth Bruen at KnujOn"<gbruen@knujon.com> Date: Mon, December 14, 2009 1:55 pm
In advance of today's policy discussion I have prepared this brief report of abuse of privacy/proxy services by illicit pharmacies.
I find this jump-to-conclusion approach to be very disturbing.
What criteria are used to say that a pharmacy is "illicit"?
Here in Santa Cruz there are "medical marijuana" clinics that are 100% lawful under California State law but 100% unlawful under US Federal law. ICANN is in no position to undertake to distinguish "licit" from "illicit".
And what criteria is used to say that a business is in "abuse of privacy/proxy services"?
It is often 100% lawful for people and corporations to not hang the identities of their operators on a shingle beyond a minimal contact for the receipt of legal process.
It really concerns me that ICANN is being used as a private hired gun through which everyone from the trademark industry to "consumer advocates" are trying to create an e-vigilante shortcut past well established legal due processes and protections.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org