Robert Guerra wrote:
That being said, I do have an issue with the congressional statement as it seemed to indicate that ICANN was supportive of freedom of expression. I would disagree, as board and GNSO decisions seem to more limit speech then anything else. Triple X being one example , wanting to censor IDN domain names another..
In other words, ICANN _does_ support freedom of expression ... to the same extent as the US government does. ;-) This, too, is no surprise. In addition to the XXX issue and the issues Milton indicates, it is easy to argue that -- under US government "oversight" -- the Intellectual Property constituency is freely allowed to assert ICANN limits on expression that go far beyond the original intent of trademark protection, or any national trademark-protection policy. And I'm sure that others can identify different limits. Unfortunately, as John suggested, many other national governments are generally in agreement with the limits supported or ignored by the US government. - Evan