ALAC Action Requested on Privacy
Dear members of the ALAC: As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy. If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected. I look forward to your comments. Danny Younger
How about activating the president's committee on privacy <http://www.icann.org/committees/privacy/> Created by the then outgoing AtLarge Director Andy Mueller-Maguhn. There's a process, just needs someone to breathe life into it. Adam At 9:44 AM -0700 5/23/08, Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Before we start making a laundry list of values - let's first review existing statements and values mentioned both by users and At-large. Privacy is such a core value - and I support - Danny's proposal that privacy be added as a core value. On the topic of additional values - instead of listing individual rights (such as privacy, gender, etc) we might want instead to focus on having ICANN adopt as a key value - a strong endorsement of the international norms such as the Vienna convention on human rights. The logic being, if it wants to act as an international body - they it should adopt and promote rights already agreed to by the international community. http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF.157.23.En regards Robert On 23-May-08, at 3:26 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
hi Robert Since you also indicate that you think privacy is a core value, I will ask you the question as well - what in your opinion makes privacy a core value? What are the reasons? I can see gender being a core value , it's pretty universal, I can see cultural diversity - pretty much universal as well - basically all the human rights ones. Privacy isn't a value enshrined in consitutions and cultures universally AFAIK. So it will help explain it if you guys could say what it is, and why it's a core value. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Before we start making a laundry list of values - let's first review existing statements and values mentioned both by users and At-large. Privacy is such a core value - and I support - Danny's proposal that privacy be added as a core value.
On the topic of additional values - instead of listing individual rights (such as privacy, gender, etc) we might want instead to focus on having ICANN adopt as a key value - a strong endorsement of the international norms such as the Vienna convention on human rights. The logic being, if it wants to act as an international body - they it should adopt and promote rights already agreed to by the international community.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF.157.23.En
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 3:26 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Jacqueline: Have we had discussions about gender before in regards to icann policy? Is there a working group, policy group that is talking about gender? have any user groups and/or at-large groups raised the issue before? I don't think so. If you want to start that - new - discussion, please feel free to do so. At-large groups have commented on the importance of privacy, and such - it is the reason I am supportive of Danny's proposal. I'm not saying one right is more important then the other - just that ALAC has raised the right of Privacy as a right before and we should include it as a core value. Of course, having ICANN adopt and include more comprehensive core values that are support of human rights would be most welcome. As I've mentioned before, instead of including a laundry list of rights to include (and ones to exclude) at-large might prefer instead to support that ICANN adopt the UNDHR as a core value. Countries have done so at the UN - icann should as well. btw. I still haven't gotten any comments from you or others on the ALAC in regards to my request to ICANN management to state if they will seek assurances from the Egyptian authorities that users from both Egypt and the region will be able to freely attend the meeting and have access to an unfiltered internet. In short I am most disappointed that ALAC and the at-large community seems mostly silent on the issue.. regards Robert On 23-May-08, at 4:08 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
hi Robert Since you also indicate that you think privacy is a core value, I will ask you the question as well - what in your opinion makes privacy a core value? What are the reasons? I can see gender being a core value , it's pretty universal, I can see cultural diversity - pretty much universal as well - basically all the human rights ones. Privacy isn't a value enshrined in consitutions and cultures universally AFAIK. So it will help explain it if you guys could say what it is, and why it's a core value.
Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Before we start making a laundry list of values - let's first review existing statements and values mentioned both by users and At-large. Privacy is such a core value - and I support - Danny's proposal that privacy be added as a core value.
On the topic of additional values - instead of listing individual rights (such as privacy, gender, etc) we might want instead to focus on having ICANN adopt as a key value - a strong endorsement of the international norms such as the Vienna convention on human rights. The logic being, if it wants to act as an international body - they it should adopt and promote rights already agreed to by the international community.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF.157.23.En
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 3:26 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
All I asked is WHY it's important to you and Danny. If you don't want to answer, fine. I NEVER suggested that we act to have gender be added - I simply noted that it wasn't there (as many other values aren't) so why do you guys want privacy added? And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Jacqueline:
Have we had discussions about gender before in regards to icann policy? Is there a working group, policy group that is talking about gender? have any user groups and/or at-large groups raised the issue before? I don't think so. If you want to start that - new - discussion, please feel free to do so.
At-large groups have commented on the importance of privacy, and such - it is the reason I am supportive of Danny's proposal. I'm not saying one right is more important then the other - just that ALAC has raised the right of Privacy as a right before and we should include it as a core value.
Of course, having ICANN adopt and include more comprehensive core values that are support of human rights would be most welcome. As I've mentioned before, instead of including a laundry list of rights to include (and ones to exclude) at-large might prefer instead to support that ICANN adopt the UNDHR as a core value. Countries have done so at the UN - icann should as well.
btw. I still haven't gotten any comments from you or others on the ALAC in regards to my request to ICANN management to state if they will seek assurances from the Egyptian authorities that users from both Egypt and the region will be able to freely attend the meeting and have access to an unfiltered internet. In short I am most disappointed that ALAC and the at-large community seems mostly silent on the issue..
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 4:08 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
hi Robert Since you also indicate that you think privacy is a core value, I will ask you the question as well - what in your opinion makes privacy a core value? What are the reasons? I can see gender being a core value , it's pretty universal, I can see cultural diversity - pretty much universal as well - basically all the human rights ones. Privacy isn't a value enshrined in consitutions and cultures universally AFAIK. So it will help explain it if you guys could say what it is, and why it's a core value.
Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Before we start making a laundry list of values - let's first review existing statements and values mentioned both by users and At-large. Privacy is such a core value - and I support - Danny's proposal that privacy be added as a core value.
On the topic of additional values - instead of listing individual rights (such as privacy, gender, etc) we might want instead to focus on having ICANN adopt as a key value - a strong endorsement of the international norms such as the Vienna convention on human rights. The logic being, if it wants to act as an international body - they it should adopt and promote rights already agreed to by the international community.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF.157.23.En
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 3:26 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
References to my earlier messages are below. Subject: [At-Large] House Leaders Urge Preservation Of ICANN Role (US) http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2... [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2... Subject: [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2... In summary - I would like to seek support from the at-large community to seek assurances from ICANN that the fall meeting will have open and unfiltered access to the internet, and be open to all internet users from the region who wish to attend. regards Robert Guerra
Robert Guerra wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
References to my earlier messages are below.
Subject: [At-Large] House Leaders Urge Preservation Of ICANN Role (US) http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
[At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
Subject: [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
In summary - I would like to seek support from the at-large community to seek assurances from ICANN that the fall meeting will have open and unfiltered access to the internet, and be open to all internet users from the region who wish to attend.
I would encourage early thinking about outreach and region-relevant focus on having unfiltered Internet access. It would be a shame if we again went to a country with unique Internet issues and failed to engage with the local users. --Wendy -- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Professor, Northeastern University School of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/
Did you put it on the ALAC meeting agenda? Robert Guerra wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
References to my earlier messages are below.
Subject: [At-Large] House Leaders Urge Preservation Of ICANN Role (US) http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
[At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
Subject: [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
In summary - I would like to seek support from the at-large community to seek assurances from ICANN that the fall meeting will have open and unfiltered access to the internet, and be open to all internet users from the region who wish to attend.
regards
Robert Guerra
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Are you implying that the issue be "parked" until the june meeting? Well, i think the issue should be openly discussed not only with the select # of individuals lucky to be on ALAC but instead - with the larger internet user community that includes both those involved with an ALS and internet users in general. In summary - i am asking for the opinion of those on this list. I am shocked that you seem to imply that to raise an issue for discussion required that it be placed on the ALAC meeting agenda first. regards Robert On 23-May-08, at 7:00 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Did you put it on the ALAC meeting agenda? Robert Guerra wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
References to my earlier messages are below.
Subject: [At-Large] House Leaders Urge Preservation Of ICANN Role (US) http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
[At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
Subject: [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
In summary - I would like to seek support from the at-large community to seek assurances from ICANN that the fall meeting will have open and unfiltered access to the internet, and be open to all internet users from the region who wish to attend.
regards
Robert Guerra
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
No - I am not implying anything, I was asking if you put it on the agenda for the ALAC teleconference on Tuesday, which as far as I know is still in May, not June, if you want the ALAC to write to the Board. I would certainly hope that before raising it as an issue and bringing it to the ALAC, you'd have had discussion and backup from the At Large Community. Given that it is time-sensitive, why wait for June? It's really interesting that you seem to think there's a lot of 'implying" - if I wanted to say it, I would write it plainly, not imply it. So what are you "implying"?!? However, I'm shocked that you would expect the ALAC to take a decision without it being raised on the agenda! (being as you are so knowledgeable on meeting procedure) :) Robert Guerra wrote:
Are you implying that the issue be "parked" until the june meeting?
Well, i think the issue should be openly discussed not only with the select # of individuals lucky to be on ALAC but instead - with the larger internet user community that includes both those involved with an ALS and internet users in general.
In summary - i am asking for the opinion of those on this list. I am shocked that you seem to imply that to raise an issue for discussion required that it be placed on the ALAC meeting agenda first.
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 7:00 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Did you put it on the ALAC meeting agenda? Robert Guerra wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
References to my earlier messages are below.
Subject: [At-Large] House Leaders Urge Preservation Of ICANN Role (US) http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
[At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
Subject: [At-Large] Middle East & North Africa Outreach http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008q2...
In summary - I would like to seek support from the at-large community to seek assurances from ICANN that the fall meeting will have open and unfiltered access to the internet, and be open to all internet users from the region who wish to attend.
regards
Robert Guerra
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
As I forwarded to the chair earlier last week - I will be unable to attend the adhoc/supplementary at-large meeting scheduled for this coming week. unfortunately, with one weeks notice was unable to move other commitments for this coming week. regards robert
Doesn't look too good http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-... At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do... regards Robert On 25-May-08, at 2:33 AM, WWWhatsup wrote:
Doesn't look too good
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-...
At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Robert Guerra wrote:
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do...
In what context? ICANN is not IGF, nor a human rights advocacy body. What has yet to be raised are issues regarding repression of bloggers that are within the mandate of ICANN to address? If there is a role for us to play within our limited scope, please elaborate. Why I am eager for ICANN to attract new ALSs from the region, I hope ICANN's objectives are made clear. What we don't need are "vision creep" and unrealistic expectations of what ICANN At-Large is able to advance. We can't even address the _existing_ mandate sufficiently. - Evan
Raise the issue where, to whom? Besides cancelling the Cairo meeting, what else is it likely that ICANN can do? Maybe the ITU might be better suited re freedom of access to the telecomms that are necessary to access the Internet, or the UN or Amnesty International re the human rights of people arrested for civil disobedience or protest - not sure who else works with political prisoners etc. But I'm pretty sure it isn't in the ICANN (or the ALAC) mandate. If ALAC wanted to, as a group of 100 groups, sign a petition, I'd probably back that, but it might be difficult to get all the ALSes to sign, and other than that, I can't see anything else to do - if you have any suggestions, be glad to hear them. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do...
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 2:33 AM, WWWhatsup wrote:
Doesn't look too good
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-...
At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items: 1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt . 2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored I await further comments and/or suggestions. regards Robert On 25-May-08, at 11:25 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Raise the issue where, to whom? Besides cancelling the Cairo meeting, what else is it likely that ICANN can do? Maybe the ITU might be better suited re freedom of access to the telecomms that are necessary to access the Internet, or the UN or Amnesty International re the human rights of people arrested for civil disobedience or protest - not sure who else works with political prisoners etc. But I'm pretty sure it isn't in the ICANN (or the ALAC) mandate. If ALAC wanted to, as a group of 100 groups, sign a petition, I'd probably back that, but it might be difficult to get all the ALSes to sign, and other than that, I can't see anything else to do - if you have any suggestions, be glad to hear them. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do...
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 2:33 AM, WWWhatsup wrote:
Doesn't look too good
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-...
At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Personally, I'm OK with 2), and would support ALAC sending a letter to the Board asking for such assurances, but with regard to 1), I still ask - raise the issue to whom? What's the specific action you want the At Large community to take regarding 1)? Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt .
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
I await further comments and/or suggestions.
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 11:25 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Raise the issue where, to whom? Besides cancelling the Cairo meeting, what else is it likely that ICANN can do? Maybe the ITU might be better suited re freedom of access to the telecomms that are necessary to access the Internet, or the UN or Amnesty International re the human rights of people arrested for civil disobedience or protest - not sure who else works with political prisoners etc. But I'm pretty sure it isn't in the ICANN (or the ALAC) mandate. If ALAC wanted to, as a group of 100 groups, sign a petition, I'd probably back that, but it might be difficult to get all the ALSes to sign, and other than that, I can't see anything else to do - if you have any suggestions, be glad to hear them. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do...
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 2:33 AM, WWWhatsup wrote:
Doesn't look too good
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-...
At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Robert Guerra wrote:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt.
You still haven't explained why or how this is within the mandate of ICANN or At-Large. With limited resources and expertise, this seems pointless in an ICANN context.
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
The response to the first part of this, as far as I understand, is that registration and attendance is already open as a matter of policy. (Has anyone who has requested registration to an ICANN event ever been refused?) As for the second part, I'm not sure that this could be guaranteed. If the whole country is censored, how could they make a technical exception for ICANN? (BTW ... shouldn't this issue have been raised _before_ the city was chosen? If freedom of Internet wasn't a criteria in site selection, it's a bit late to ask for assurances now. But then I have long believed that the meeting-site selection process is a big botch anyway.) - Evan
This is a clear example of how AL issues are being replaced with nonAL issues. And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo? And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting. Or it is only a question of being active on the list? Veni On 5/25/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt .
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
I await further comments and/or suggestions.
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 11:25 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Raise the issue where, to whom? Besides cancelling the Cairo meeting, what else is it likely that ICANN can do? Maybe the ITU might be better suited re freedom of access to the telecomms that are necessary to access the Internet, or the UN or Amnesty International re the human rights of people arrested for civil disobedience or protest - not sure who else works with political prisoners etc. But I'm pretty sure it isn't in the ICANN (or the ALAC) mandate. If ALAC wanted to, as a group of 100 groups, sign a petition, I'd probably back that, but it might be difficult to get all the ALSes to sign, and other than that, I can't see anything else to do - if you have any suggestions, be glad to hear them. Jacqueline Robert Guerra wrote:
Glad you mentioned a reference to global voices. In fact, i mentioned them earlier . Suffice it to say, that I would hope that at-large can proactively raise the issue. If it doesn't, likely there will be others who do...
regards
Robert
On 25-May-08, at 2:33 AM, WWWhatsup wrote:
Doesn't look too good
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/05/16/egypt-torture-for-bloggers-and-...
At 17:37 2008-05-23, you wrote:
On 23-May-08, at 5:17 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
And I have no idea what you are talking about re Egypt.
WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Veni: On 25-May-08, at 2:29 PM, Veni Markovski wrote:
This is a clear example of how AL issues are being replaced with nonAL issues.
a quick question - If you are saying this in your personal capacity, or is it "ICANN" saying that issues of freedom of expression, censorship and online surveillence are not "issues for At-Large" to care about. ALAC's bylaws would seem to indicate that my questions and request for comments from the at-large community are - well within - the scope of ALAC From the ICANN bylaws.. http://icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#XI 4. At-Large Advisory Committee 4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users. - Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below). To exercise our role, then we there's a need to learn about the regions where internet users are active and bring their comments and opinions to ICANN. Reports and contacts with users in Egypt indicate that issues of freedom of expression online and censorship are one of their key concerns. Ref - http://del.icio.us/internetfreedom/egypt Egyptians Take One Step Toward Change, One Step Back World Politics Review, 13 May 08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2108 Egypt's Facebook Revolution http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/05/egypts_f... When most people log onto Facebook, the thought of fomenting revolution is pretty far from their minds. But in the Middle East, and most recently in Egypt, Facebook has become an important platform for dissent in countries that routinely clampdown on liberal activists, and where the mosque has traditionally been the only outlet for venting political frustration. -- Section 4j para 3: 4j. The ALAC is also responsible, working in conjunction with the RALOs, for coordinating the following activities: 3. Promoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users; I have asked what (if any) outreach efforts have been developed to engage and recruit ALS's from Egypt and/or the middle east. Engaging internet users and possible ALS's from Egypt is well within the scope of ALAC's mission.
And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo?
I want to be proactive and seek from ICANN and the organizers of the meeting assurances that the standard practice of allowing for "open registration" and meeting the specifications in the Meetings RFP (see below) in regards to connectivity.
And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting.
Again - are you asking as a ICANN staff person, or in your personal capacity.. as for issues - i am keen that there not be any. As there is well documented that censorship and limitations to freedom of expression exist online in Egypt, I want to make sure that is not the icann for those attending and participating at the meeting.
Or it is only a question of being active on the list?
well - as you can see from the montly stats, i'm not the most active person on here... The mission and focus of my ALS - privaterra - is that of providing technical and policy advice to NGOs (particularly human rights and social justice organizations) regarding IT security and internet governance. As such, I am well familiar with the issue of "internet users" in the MENA (middle east & north africa region) . With little to no activity of ALS's from the region - i am keen to make sure their voices and concerns are taken into consideration by at-large and ICANN as a whole. Seeing the meeting is months away - I would like to suggest that ALAC, at-large and ICANN take proactive steps to not only engage the Egyptian meeting organizers, but also the internet users from the country. We are missing representation from that part of the world - and as such, am keen that their voices, issues and concerns be made by their own representatives. outreach and engagement - is well within the ICANN bylaws? Or do you think otherwise? regards Robert -- Ref: http://icann.org/meetings/rfp/rfp-2007.htm IV. Basic Requirements the Local Host Must Meet Please note that these elements are required to hold a successful meeting and are not simply recommendations. If the local host finds a need to modify these arrangements, the changes must be approved by ICANN in advance of the meeting. [snipped] B. Network Infrastructure Due to the nature of the conference and its attendees the Network infrastructure is an essential and critical aspect of the meeting. Attendees MUST be able to reliably send and receive both encrypted and unencrypted data freely. The importance of adequate and reliable systems cannot be expressed enough. The network must be fully operational from Day 0 until Day 8. The following information has been included to assist the ICANN meeting staff in the solicitation of offers from IT vendors. Bandwidth and Internet Requirements: 1. BANDWIDTH: External bandwidth (Internet Transit) must be in the form of dedicated circuits of at least 10mbps capacity and must include redundant paths. Preference may be given to proposals that contain higher capacity and more detailed redundancy planning. 2. ADDRESSING: At least a /22 (1024 addresses) of publicly routable IPv4 address space must be made available for use during the conference. Using RFC1918 space and/or NAT (Network Address Translation) has been known to cause problems and is strongly discouraged. However, if using RFC1918 or NAT space is the only way to facilitate our technical requirements, then a letter explaining IN DETAIL the issue/solution is mandatory and must be approved by the ICANN Technical Staff prior to the proposal being accepted. 3. ADDRESSING: Though not required, offering IPv6 addresses to the conference attendees IN ADDITION to the required IPv4 address space would be desired. Preference may be given to proposals that offer both addressing solutions. 4. ROUTING: The conference routers/gateways must be configured with a minimum of filters so as not to affect tunnelling software used by the conference attendees. Only filters that are required to protect the network must be in place. ICANN reserves the right to approve or disapprove any filters used at the conference. Any known filtering that will occur at the meeting should be described in your proposal. 5. SERVICE LEVEL: Access to high-level support by the transit provider must be available 24 hours a day for the duration of the conference by the local host support staff. Troubleshooting transit and bandwidth issues often takes place at odd times so as to not impact the conference. Local Infrastructure Requirements: 1. DIAGRAM: In order to be considered to provide technical service to the ICANN meeting, the IT vendor must provide a diagram (JPG or PDF) to the ICANN technical staff detailing the local infrastructure of the meeting. This is to include the switched network, the wireless network, and core infrastructure (servers) that will make up the local infrastructure. 2. DHCP: All addressing of the attendees hosts must be accomplished through DHCP. All DHCP server(s) must reside within the local infrastructure. 3. RESERVED IP: A small range of IP addresses (32 addresses) must remain available to make static assignments hosts if necessary. This would include any servers, printers and/or any other host (to be determined by ICANN technical staff) 4. SMTP: An SMTP server is required to allow the conference attendees to send email. Email relay must be allowed from the IP address range(s) of the conference and an IP range further specified by the ICANN staff. 5. DNS: At least two recursive (caching) DNS servers must be available. At least one of these servers must reside WITHIN the local infrastructure. The other may reside at the transit provider(s) but must be topologically close to the conference network. Reverse delegation (in-addr.arpa) must be used on the network block(s) being used at the meeting. 6. WIRELESS: 802.11(b and/or g) must be available throughout the meeting venue. This includes the main meeting room, board and staff workrooms, smaller meeting rooms, "Internet Café"/terminal room, common areas, hotel lobby and bar, etc. Where possible, wireless or high-speed wired access should be offered in guest rooms. 7. WIRELESS: The SSID of the conference MUST be: ICANN and MUST NOT be WEP/WPA enabled. 8. MONITORING: Monitoring of traffic MUST be restricted to ONLY that necessary for network maintenance and diagnostics. Any monitoring tools MUST be made available upon request. 9. PROXY: ICANN requires that the IT vendor NOT use proxies in any form. If you feel that you are unable to provide services without using a proxy, please send a detailed explanation during the vendor selection process. ICANN MUST approve of the use of proxies. If the local host is aware that proxies are required in their locale, ICANN must be notified during the proposal process. 10. HARDWARE: Replaceable backups of critical services hardware should be standing by (DHCP, DNS, SMTP, etc). The ability to replace critical equipment within one hour of the problem being detected is required. 11. SERVICE LEVEL: The local hosts shall provide adequate qualified staffing for the setup, running and teardown of the network infrastructure. A technical representative MUST be onsite from 7am-9pm daily. IF a problem arises there MUST be a representative that can be contacted immediately and be onsite within 30 minutes of the initiation of the phone call during hours outside of those stated above. 12. INFRASTRUCTURE: Keep it simple. Keeping the network infrastructure as a simple, straightforward network increases the probability of network uptime and reliance.
On 5/25/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt .
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
I await further comments and/or suggestions.
regards
Robert
(as some of you might have seen - the issue of user rights and censorship are of keen interest to me. As such, I responded quickly before reviewing the text of the email. am resending with minor corrections) Veni: On 25-May-08, at 2:29 PM, Veni Markovski wrote:
This is a clear example of how AL issues are being replaced with nonAL issues.
a quick question - Are you saying this in your personal capacity, or is it "ICANN" saying that issues of freedom of expression, censorship and online surveillence are not "issues for At-Large" to care about. ALAC's bylaws would seem to indicate that my questions and request for comments from the at-large community are - well within - the scope of ALAC From the ICANN bylaws.. http://icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#XI 4. At-Large Advisory Committee 4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users. - Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below). To exercise our role, then we need to learn about the regions where internet users are active and bring their comments and opinions to ICANN. Reports and contacts with users in Egypt indicate that issues of freedom of expression online and censorship are one of their key concerns. Ref - http://del.icio.us/internetfreedom/egypt Egyptians Take One Step Toward Change, One Step Back World Politics Review, 13 May 08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2108 Egypt's Facebook Revolution http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/05/egypts_f... When most people log onto Facebook, the thought of fomenting revolution is pretty far from their minds. But in the Middle East, and most recently in Egypt, Facebook has become an important platform for dissent in countries that routinely clampdown on liberal activists, and where the mosque has traditionally been the only outlet for venting political frustration. -- Section 4j para 3: 4j. The ALAC is also responsible, working in conjunction with the RALOs, for coordinating the following activities: 3. Promoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users; I have asked [now numerous times] what (if any) outreach efforts have been developed to engage and recruit ALS's from Egypt and/or the middle east. Engaging internet users and possible ALS's from Egypt is well within the scope of ALAC's mission.
And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo?
I want to be proactive and seek from ICANN and the organizers of the meeting assurances that the standard practice of allowing for "open registration" and meeting the specifications in the Meetings RFP (see below) in regards to connectivity have been met. I don't want people to complain - after the fact - and given the issues that "might" arise, I think it prudent to ask well in advance of the meeting taking place.
And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting.
as for issues - i am keen that there not be any. It is well documented that censorship and limitations to freedom of expression exist online in Egypt. Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA) published a rather public statement the other day in which he and other congressional representatives seem to indicate that ICANN promotes free speech principles . If such is not the case, then well - he should be so informed by worldwide internet users. http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=3342&Itemid=12...
Or it is only a question of being active on the list?
well - as you can see from the montly stats, i'm not the most active person on here... The mission and focus of my ALS - privaterra - is that of providing technical and policy advice to NGOs (particularly human rights and social justice organizations) regarding IT security and internet governance. As such, I am well familiar with the issue of "internet users" in the MENA (middle east & north africa region) . With little to no activity of ALS's from the region - i am keen to make sure their voices and concerns are taken into consideration by at-large and ICANN as a whole. Seeing the meeting is months away - I would like to recommend that ALAC, at-large and ICANN take proactive steps to not only engage the Egyptian meeting organizers, but also internet users from Egypt . We are missing representation from that part of the world - and as such, am keen that their voices, issues and concerns be made by their own representatives. outreach and engagement - is well within the ICANN bylaws? Or do you think otherwise? regards Robert -- Ref: http://icann.org/meetings/rfp/rfp-2007.htm IV. Basic Requirements the Local Host Must Meet Please note that these elements are required to hold a successful meeting and are not simply recommendations. If the local host finds a need to modify these arrangements, the changes must be approved by ICANN in advance of the meeting. [snipped] B. Network Infrastructure Due to the nature of the conference and its attendees the Network infrastructure is an essential and critical aspect of the meeting. Attendees MUST be able to reliably send and receive both encrypted and unencrypted data freely. The importance of adequate and reliable systems cannot be expressed enough. The network must be fully operational from Day 0 until Day 8. The following information has been included to assist the ICANN meeting staff in the solicitation of offers from IT vendors. Bandwidth and Internet Requirements: 1. BANDWIDTH: External bandwidth (Internet Transit) must be in the form of dedicated circuits of at least 10mbps capacity and must include redundant paths. Preference may be given to proposals that contain higher capacity and more detailed redundancy planning. 2. ADDRESSING: At least a /22 (1024 addresses) of publicly routable IPv4 address space must be made available for use during the conference. Using RFC1918 space and/or NAT (Network Address Translation) has been known to cause problems and is strongly discouraged. However, if using RFC1918 or NAT space is the only way to facilitate our technical requirements, then a letter explaining IN DETAIL the issue/solution is mandatory and must be approved by the ICANN Technical Staff prior to the proposal being accepted. 3. ADDRESSING: Though not required, offering IPv6 addresses to the conference attendees IN ADDITION to the required IPv4 address space would be desired. Preference may be given to proposals that offer both addressing solutions. 4. ROUTING: The conference routers/gateways must be configured with a minimum of filters so as not to affect tunnelling software used by the conference attendees. Only filters that are required to protect the network must be in place. ICANN reserves the right to approve or disapprove any filters used at the conference. Any known filtering that will occur at the meeting should be described in your proposal. 5. SERVICE LEVEL: Access to high-level support by the transit provider must be available 24 hours a day for the duration of the conference by the local host support staff. Troubleshooting transit and bandwidth issues often takes place at odd times so as to not impact the conference. Local Infrastructure Requirements: 1. DIAGRAM: In order to be considered to provide technical service to the ICANN meeting, the IT vendor must provide a diagram (JPG or PDF) to the ICANN technical staff detailing the local infrastructure of the meeting. This is to include the switched network, the wireless network, and core infrastructure (servers) that will make up the local infrastructure. 2. DHCP: All addressing of the attendees hosts must be accomplished through DHCP. All DHCP server(s) must reside within the local infrastructure. 3. RESERVED IP: A small range of IP addresses (32 addresses) must remain available to make static assignments hosts if necessary. This would include any servers, printers and/or any other host (to be determined by ICANN technical staff) 4. SMTP: An SMTP server is required to allow the conference attendees to send email. Email relay must be allowed from the IP address range(s) of the conference and an IP range further specified by the ICANN staff. 5. DNS: At least two recursive (caching) DNS servers must be available. At least one of these servers must reside WITHIN the local infrastructure. The other may reside at the transit provider(s) but must be topologically close to the conference network. Reverse delegation (in-addr.arpa) must be used on the network block(s) being used at the meeting. 6. WIRELESS: 802.11(b and/or g) must be available throughout the meeting venue. This includes the main meeting room, board and staff workrooms, smaller meeting rooms, "Internet Café"/terminal room, common areas, hotel lobby and bar, etc. Where possible, wireless or high-speed wired access should be offered in guest rooms. 7. WIRELESS: The SSID of the conference MUST be: ICANN and MUST NOT be WEP/WPA enabled. 8. MONITORING: Monitoring of traffic MUST be restricted to ONLY that necessary for network maintenance and diagnostics. Any monitoring tools MUST be made available upon request. 9. PROXY: ICANN requires that the IT vendor NOT use proxies in any form. If you feel that you are unable to provide services without using a proxy, please send a detailed explanation during the vendor selection process. ICANN MUST approve of the use of proxies. If the local host is aware that proxies are required in their locale, ICANN must be notified during the proposal process. 10. HARDWARE: Replaceable backups of critical services hardware should be standing by (DHCP, DNS, SMTP, etc). The ability to replace critical equipment within one hour of the problem being detected is required. 11. SERVICE LEVEL: The local hosts shall provide adequate qualified staffing for the setup, running and teardown of the network infrastructure. A technical representative MUST be onsite from 7am-9pm daily. IF a problem arises there MUST be a representative that can be contacted immediately and be onsite within 30 minutes of the initiation of the phone call during hours outside of those stated above. 12. INFRASTRUCTURE: Keep it simple. Keeping the network infrastructure as a simple, straightforward network increases the probability of network uptime and reliance.
On 5/25/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt .
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
I await further comments and/or suggestions.
regards
Robert
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below).
Individual Internet users do all sorts of stuff. By this logic, we should be lobbying in favor of clean drinking water and sanitary sewers, too. There are all sorts of things that are virtuous and important, but outside ICANN's scope. ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management. It makes sense to do what we can to encourage and enable individuals from north Africa and west Asia to participate at the meeting, but beyond that, we're off in the weeds. R's, John
John: One of the technical measures used in the the region to implement censorship of websites - is via blocking and/or poisoning the DNS. Thus, the discussion is - i believe - is inside ICANN's scope. Furthermore, I have also called for outreach efforts that can be planned well ahead of the fall meeting to inform internet users about ICANN, and see they can participate in our discussions. That too, i believe is well inside ALAC's scope and mission regards Robert On 25-May-08, at 4:22 PM, John Levine wrote:
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below).
Individual Internet users do all sorts of stuff. By this logic, we should be lobbying in favor of clean drinking water and sanitary sewers, too. There are all sorts of things that are virtuous and important, but outside ICANN's scope.
ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management. It makes sense to do what we can to encourage and enable individuals from north Africa and west Asia to participate at the meeting, but beyond that, we're off in the weeds.
R's, John
Robert Guerra wrote:
One of the technical measures used in the the region to implement censorship of websites - is via blocking and/or poisoning the DNS. Thus, the discussion is - i believe - is inside ICANN's scope.
It certainly is. Please elaborate. Searching the web for examples of Egypt-specific DNS poisoning comes up empty.
Furthermore, I have also called for outreach efforts that can be planned well ahead of the fall meeting to inform internet users about ICANN, and see they can participate in our discussions. That too, i believe is well inside ALAC's scope and mission.
Sure. But these are very different requests from the ones you originally made. Why didn't you ask for this at the start? - Evan
Dear Robert, Colleagues I have been silently following the debate and discussion on Egypt Vs Internet and i would like to give some comments : * Internet Filtering in Egypt : Egypt dose not have an internet filtering system or policies not even pornography like the Gulf states ( e.g Saudi, Emirate , ..ect ), but Egypt government is seriously cracking down political bloggers . Young generations and internet users in the middle east as other internet users are worldwide are enjoying the collaboration nature of web 2.0 applications like facebook, and started to use such applications for lobbying, freedom of speech and expression . Egypt is leading country in the middle east on issues of freedom of expression when compared to other countries, Egypt enjoy free press and media houses. Human rights activists and local NGOs are playing a major role in protecting the freedom of expression on the internet in Egypt. Am not sure what ICANN can do in this regard, as it will be seen as interfaring in a internal issues, and i guess its not ICANN core responsibility.
Robert, All AfRALO is working toward an Africa ALS meeting in ICANN Cairo meetings, many of the region ALS and Internet experts in the region ( specially north Africa), this will be a good chance to discuss internet issues in the region which among it could be right of access, content filter and any other issues might be raised by ALS . Regards, Mohamed El Bashir
Ditto this Thanks John - you do write well! But I would add - encourage and enable individuals from the region to participate at the meeting AS WELL AS in all ICANN activities (that are interesting and relevant to them) Jacqueline John Levine wrote:
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below).
Individual Internet users do all sorts of stuff. By this logic, we should be lobbying in favor of clean drinking water and sanitary sewers, too. There are all sorts of things that are virtuous and important, but outside ICANN's scope.
ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management. It makes sense to do what we can to encourage and enable individuals from north Africa and west Asia to participate at the meeting, but beyond that, we're off in the weeds.
R's, John
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Jacqueline, Let me follow up on your and John's statement "...encourage and enable individuals from the region to participate at the meeting...". As you know, I'm from West Asia, but twice in the last few years I've been denied visas to go to Egypt for meetings to which I had been invited by very legitimate bodies including the Library of Alexandria where I was to give a talk at the opening. Reason: I carry an Iranian passport. Very recently, an IDN meeting was to take place in Cairo; I explained my predicament to Egyptian GAC representative who assured me she'll get things straightened out, but she has not been able to. Now a lot of things may not be within the purview of ICANN, but ICANN could at least be asked to seek assurance of cooperation from the host country in the issuance of visas for people from the region! Siavash
Ditto this Thanks John - you do write well! But I would add - encourage and enable individuals from the region to participate at the meeting AS WELL AS in all ICANN activities (that are interesting and relevant to them) Jacqueline John Levine wrote:
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below).
Individual Internet users do all sorts of stuff. By this logic, we should be lobbying in favor of clean drinking water and sanitary sewers, too. There are all sorts of things that are virtuous and important, but outside ICANN's scope.
ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management. It makes sense to do what we can to encourage and enable individuals from north Africa and west Asia to participate at the meeting, but beyond that, we're off in the weeds.
R's, John
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah@irnic.ir, shahshah@nic.ir -----------------------------------------------
Good point. Jacqueline Siavash Shahshahani wrote:
Jacqueline, Let me follow up on your and John's statement "...encourage and enable individuals from the region to participate at the meeting...". As you know, I'm from West Asia, but twice in the last few years I've been denied visas to go to Egypt for meetings to which I had been invited by very legitimate bodies including the Library of Alexandria where I was to give a talk at the opening. Reason: I carry an Iranian passport. Very recently, an IDN meeting was to take place in Cairo; I explained my predicament to Egyptian GAC representative who assured me she'll get things straightened out, but she has not been able to. Now a lot of things may not be within the purview of ICANN, but ICANN could at least be asked to seek assurance of cooperation from the host country in the issuance of visas for people from the region! Siavash
Ditto this Thanks John - you do write well! But I would add - encourage and enable individuals from the region to participate at the meeting AS WELL AS in all ICANN activities (that are interesting and relevant to them) Jacqueline John Levine wrote:
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below).
Individual Internet users do all sorts of stuff. By this logic, we should be lobbying in favor of clean drinking water and sanitary sewers, too. There are all sorts of things that are virtuous and important, but outside ICANN's scope.
ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management. It makes sense to do what we can to encourage and enable individuals from north Africa and west Asia to participate at the meeting, but beyond that, we're off in the weeds.
R's, John
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah@irnic.ir, shahshah@nic.ir -----------------------------------------------
On Mon, 26 May 2008 18:05:03 +0430 (IRDT), "Siavash Shahshahani" <shahshah@irnic.ir> wrote:
ICANN could at least be asked to seek assurance of cooperation from the host country in the issuance of visas for people from the region!
Siavash, Having hosted a previous ICANN meeting, I confirm ICANN specifically asks the local hosts to make visa issuance easier for all participants. In our case, we were lucky to have a direct contact with the government officials, which indeed made issuance easier. Still, I can remember a few visas were nevertheless declined. Just do not expect ICANN and the local hosts to be able to change long standing political choices. Best, Patrick Vande Walle
Thanks, Patrick. Which brings the conversation to the point that Robert's initial e-mail was not for this mailing list. I hate to see the AL list turning into a cover version of the "Internet Governance Caucus" list, where people talk about anything, and achieve nothing. Perhaps one of the reasons why people in general are not willing to participat in such discussions, is that they don't want to waste their time in aimless conversations... Soon we'll be discussing not only Internet freedoms (there are a number of places where this could happen), privacy, freedom of speech, etc. But at the same time the western proponents of these very freedoms are quite quiet on the issue of affordability of the Internet access, or accesability, or why even in their own countries there is no real competition, etc., etc - many topics which could be discussed at the IGF, but instead are being forcefully driven into the AL and other lists, dedicated to specific issues. Veni At 01:30 PM 5/27/2008 +0200, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
On Mon, 26 May 2008 18:05:03 +0430 (IRDT), "Siavash Shahshahani" <shahshah@irnic.ir> wrote:
ICANN could at least be asked to seek assurance of cooperation from the host country in the issuance of visas for people from the region!
Siavash,
Having hosted a previous ICANN meeting, I confirm ICANN specifically asks the local hosts to make visa issuance easier for all participants. In our case, we were lucky to have a direct contact with the government officials, which indeed made issuance easier. Still, I can remember a few visas were nevertheless declined. Just do not expect ICANN and the local hosts to be able to change long standing political choices.
Best,
Patrick Vande Walle
At 22:22 25/05/2008, John Levine wrote:
ICANN's remit is really quite narrow: DNS, IP allocation, and minor IANA registry management.
100% agreement. However, the "IANA" and its evolution opens some possibilities due to the Multilingual and Semantic Internet evolution. This could be a topic for unformal discussion in Paris. The fall-out of the http://ml-dns.org. However, this still requires an important work by france@large, Intlnet and the MLTF in order to propose a consistant working framework to the @large community that can match ICANN, IAB, WSIS's objectives, and our's as the network co-owners. jfc
At 22:13 25/05/2008, Robert Guerra wrote:
Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA) published a rather public statement the other day in which he and other congressional representatives seem to indicate that ICANN promotes free speech principles . If such is not the case, then well - he should be so informed by worldwide internet users.
We all know that ICANN seems to be under pressure by Markey's friends to follow an US Democrat oriented policy. This is probably the case. But this should be clarified this year, because either ICANN is purely technical and can be unique in a (de)centralised network or it is not, and there is a need of political distribution leading to ICANN national or regional counter parts. Obviously, the role of the ALAC would then not be the same. jfc
Robert, I am tired of explaining over and over again things which are CLEAR, crystal as they say: I'm not subscribed here as @icann.org, or @government.bg, or @president.bg, or whatever else you want to divert the conversation to. Way back when I was on the board of ICANN the same stupid alusions were used to make as if I spoke on beahlf of ICANN (you probably remember, or at least know that one cannot speak on behalf of an organization he or she serves on the board of, unless authorized). This will be as stupid as me asking you every time if you speak as yourself, or as Privaterra, or whatever other affiliation you might have. Now, the fact that you may have interest in privacy, does not respond to Evan's questions, and I guess that's why you are diverting the conversation. Please, get back to constructive mode, and stop with the silly questions "in what capacity I speak". Veni On 5/25/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
(as some of you might have seen - the issue of user rights and censorship are of keen interest to me. As such, I responded quickly before reviewing the text of the email. am resending with minor corrections)
Veni:
On 25-May-08, at 2:29 PM, Veni Markovski wrote:
This is a clear example of how AL issues are being replaced with nonAL issues.
a quick question -
Are you saying this in your personal capacity, or is it "ICANN" saying that issues of freedom of expression, censorship and online surveillence are not "issues for At-Large" to care about.
ALAC's bylaws would seem to indicate that my questions and request for comments from the at-large community are - well within - the scope of ALAC
From the ICANN bylaws..
http://icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#XI
4. At-Large Advisory Committee
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below). To exercise our role, then we need to learn about the regions where internet users are active and bring their comments and opinions to ICANN. Reports and contacts with users in Egypt indicate that issues of freedom of expression online and censorship are one of their key concerns.
Ref - http://del.icio.us/internetfreedom/egypt
Egyptians Take One Step Toward Change, One Step Back World Politics Review, 13 May 08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2108
Egypt's Facebook Revolution http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/05/egypts_f...
When most people log onto Facebook, the thought of fomenting revolution is pretty far from their minds. But in the Middle East, and most recently in Egypt, Facebook has become an important platform for dissent in countries that routinely clampdown on liberal activists, and where the mosque has traditionally been the only outlet for venting political frustration.
-- Section 4j para 3:
4j. The ALAC is also responsible, working in conjunction with the RALOs, for coordinating the following activities:
3. Promoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users;
I have asked [now numerous times] what (if any) outreach efforts have been developed to engage and recruit ALS's from Egypt and/or the middle east. Engaging internet users and possible ALS's from Egypt is well within the scope of ALAC's mission.
And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo?
I want to be proactive and seek from ICANN and the organizers of the meeting assurances that the standard practice of allowing for "open registration" and meeting the specifications in the Meetings RFP (see below) in regards to connectivity have been met.
I don't want people to complain - after the fact - and given the issues that "might" arise, I think it prudent to ask well in advance of the meeting taking place.
And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting.
as for issues - i am keen that there not be any. It is well documented that censorship and limitations to freedom of expression exist online in Egypt. Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA) published a rather public statement the other day in which he and other congressional representatives seem to indicate that ICANN promotes free speech principles . If such is not the case, then well - he should be so informed by worldwide internet users.
http://markey.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=3342&Itemid=12...
Or it is only a question of being active on the list?
well - as you can see from the montly stats, i'm not the most active person on here... The mission and focus of my ALS - privaterra - is that of providing technical and policy advice to NGOs (particularly human rights and social justice organizations) regarding IT security and internet governance.
As such, I am well familiar with the issue of "internet users" in the MENA (middle east & north africa region) . With little to no activity of ALS's from the region - i am keen to make sure their voices and concerns are taken into consideration by at-large and ICANN as a whole. Seeing the meeting is months away - I would like to recommend that ALAC, at-large and ICANN take proactive steps to not only engage the Egyptian meeting organizers, but also internet users from Egypt . We are missing representation from that part of the world - and as such, am keen that their voices, issues and concerns be made by their own representatives.
outreach and engagement - is well within the ICANN bylaws? Or do you think otherwise?
regards
Robert -- Ref:
http://icann.org/meetings/rfp/rfp-2007.htm
IV. Basic Requirements the Local Host Must Meet
Please note that these elements are required to hold a successful meeting and are not simply recommendations. If the local host finds a need to modify these arrangements, the changes must be approved by ICANN in advance of the meeting.
[snipped]
B. Network Infrastructure
Due to the nature of the conference and its attendees the Network infrastructure is an essential and critical aspect of the meeting. Attendees MUST be able to reliably send and receive both encrypted and unencrypted data freely. The importance of adequate and reliable systems cannot be expressed enough. The network must be fully operational from Day 0 until Day 8. The following information has been included to assist the ICANN meeting staff in the solicitation of offers from IT vendors.
Bandwidth and Internet Requirements:
1. BANDWIDTH: External bandwidth (Internet Transit) must be in the form of dedicated circuits of at least 10mbps capacity and must include redundant paths. Preference may be given to proposals that contain higher capacity and more detailed redundancy planning. 2. ADDRESSING: At least a /22 (1024 addresses) of publicly routable IPv4 address space must be made available for use during the conference. Using RFC1918 space and/or NAT (Network Address Translation) has been known to cause problems and is strongly discouraged. However, if using RFC1918 or NAT space is the only way to facilitate our technical requirements, then a letter explaining IN DETAIL the issue/solution is mandatory and must be approved by the ICANN Technical Staff prior to the proposal being accepted. 3. ADDRESSING: Though not required, offering IPv6 addresses to the conference attendees IN ADDITION to the required IPv4 address space would be desired. Preference may be given to proposals that offer both addressing solutions. 4. ROUTING: The conference routers/gateways must be configured with a minimum of filters so as not to affect tunnelling software used by the conference attendees. Only filters that are required to protect the network must be in place. ICANN reserves the right to approve or disapprove any filters used at the conference. Any known filtering that will occur at the meeting should be described in your proposal. 5. SERVICE LEVEL: Access to high-level support by the transit provider must be available 24 hours a day for the duration of the conference by the local host support staff. Troubleshooting transit and bandwidth issues often takes place at odd times so as to not impact the conference.
Local Infrastructure Requirements:
1. DIAGRAM: In order to be considered to provide technical service to the ICANN meeting, the IT vendor must provide a diagram (JPG or PDF) to the ICANN technical staff detailing the local infrastructure of the meeting. This is to include the switched network, the wireless network, and core infrastructure (servers) that will make up the local infrastructure. 2. DHCP: All addressing of the attendees hosts must be accomplished through DHCP. All DHCP server(s) must reside within the local infrastructure. 3. RESERVED IP: A small range of IP addresses (32 addresses) must remain available to make static assignments hosts if necessary. This would include any servers, printers and/or any other host (to be determined by ICANN technical staff) 4. SMTP: An SMTP server is required to allow the conference attendees to send email. Email relay must be allowed from the IP address range(s) of the conference and an IP range further specified by the ICANN staff. 5. DNS: At least two recursive (caching) DNS servers must be available. At least one of these servers must reside WITHIN the local infrastructure. The other may reside at the transit provider(s) but must be topologically close to the conference network. Reverse delegation (in-addr.arpa) must be used on the network block(s) being used at the meeting. 6. WIRELESS: 802.11(b and/or g) must be available throughout the meeting venue. This includes the main meeting room, board and staff workrooms, smaller meeting rooms, "Internet Café"/terminal room, common areas, hotel lobby and bar, etc. Where possible, wireless or high-speed wired access should be offered in guest rooms. 7. WIRELESS: The SSID of the conference MUST be: ICANN and MUST NOT be WEP/WPA enabled. 8. MONITORING: Monitoring of traffic MUST be restricted to ONLY that necessary for network maintenance and diagnostics. Any monitoring tools MUST be made available upon request. 9. PROXY: ICANN requires that the IT vendor NOT use proxies in any form. If you feel that you are unable to provide services without using a proxy, please send a detailed explanation during the vendor selection process. ICANN MUST approve of the use of proxies. If the local host is aware that proxies are required in their locale, ICANN must be notified during the proposal process. 10. HARDWARE: Replaceable backups of critical services hardware should be standing by (DHCP, DNS, SMTP, etc). The ability to replace critical equipment within one hour of the problem being detected is required. 11. SERVICE LEVEL: The local hosts shall provide adequate qualified staffing for the setup, running and teardown of the network infrastructure. A technical representative MUST be onsite from 7am-9pm daily. IF a problem arises there MUST be a representative that can be contacted immediately and be onsite within 30 minutes of the initiation of the phone call during hours outside of those stated above. 12. INFRASTRUCTURE: Keep it simple. Keeping the network infrastructure as a simple, straightforward network increases the probability of network uptime and reliance.
On 5/25/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
I'll repeat two specific items that I mentioned in my original message to the list on the topic. That being, that I would like to consult the at-large community on two specific items:
1. raise the issue of limitations to freedom of expression and censorship that takes place en Egypt, and if the at-large community would be interested in raising this - key issue for internet users in Egypt .
2. seek assurances from ICANN that the meeting will be open to all internet users that wish to attend the meeting and that the internet available at the meeting will be uncensored
I await further comments and/or suggestions.
regards
Robert
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Robert, to respond to the rest of your message, and to make sure you have this in writing (with my permission to forward to other lists, where I don't participate, but where I remember stupid questions and alusions being asked over and over again): I don't remember ever responding on behalf of ICANN in any mailing lists. I've stated many times, when I was on the Board, and every time people will try to drive the discussion from the important point about what I said to the useless and personal one as who said it, that there's no way for me, or any other Board member, or staff employee, or anyone related to ICANN to speak on behalf of the organization, as it has President/CEO and Chairman of the Board, who do that. Not amazingly, you start your own email with an "innocent" quick question, pointing exactly in that direction. Could you tell me, on what base whatsoever, you decided that I may be speaking on behalf of ICANN? Now, let's see (without making any alusions about you:) ... At 04:13 PM 5/25/2008 -0400, Robert Guerra wrote:
4. At-Large Advisory Committee
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below). To exercise our role, then we need to learn about the regions where internet users are active and bring their comments and opinions to ICANN. Reports and contacts with users in Egypt indicate that issues of freedom of expression online and censorship are one of their key concerns.
Do you know that someone from Egypt has been banned on discussing issues, related to "the activities of ICANN"? From what you quoted further, you talk about Facebook, which is not an ICANN activity.
I have asked [now numerous times] what (if any) outreach efforts have been developed to engage and recruit ALS's from Egypt and/or the middle east. Engaging internet users and possible ALS's from Egypt is well within the scope of ALAC's mission.
This is not what you were asking in your original message, where you were talking about something else, and as many people pointed out - not related to the ALAC.
And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo?
I want to be proactive and seek from ICANN and the organizers of the meeting assurances that the standard practice of allowing for "open registration" and meeting the specifications in the Meetings RFP (see below) in regards to connectivity have been met. I don't want people to complain - after the fact - and given the issues that "might" arise, I think it prudent to ask well in advance of the meeting taking place.
Well... Don't you have concerns about the quality of the water in the hotel? Or, did you have concerns about the stomach problems in India, and did you ask the local hosts to make sure they wash the salads, and cook at high temperature? And do you have ANY information that registration will be "closed" (as opposed to "open")? Or it is, as I say, an imitation of a discussion?
And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting.
as for issues - i am keen that there not be any. It is well documented that censorship and limitations to freedom of expression exist online in Egypt...
...and this is within the scope of the ALAC, says Robert Guerra from Privaterra.
Or it is only a question of being active on the list?
well - as you can see from the montly stats, i'm not the most active person on here...
I don't know if it is true, but you have the rare capability of starting a non-sense discussion, which might make people not willing to participate at all.
The mission and focus of my ALS - privaterra - is that of providing technical and policy advice to NGOs (particularly human rights and social justice organizations) regarding IT security and internet governance.
Then you have the full right to use Privaterra to do what you want ALAC do. Or, in other words - since you have the means to achieve your goals, why are you trying to achieve them with the help of the ALAC, which has not the same goals as Privaterra. veni
Veni, A more lenient tone would be worthy. I am already trying too... Dominik -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Veni Markovski Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:13 PM To: Robert Guerra; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Egypt vs internet (resending) Robert, to respond to the rest of your message, and to make sure you have this in writing (with my permission to forward to other lists, where I don't participate, but where I remember stupid questions and alusions being asked over and over again): I don't remember ever responding on behalf of ICANN in any mailing lists. I've stated many times, when I was on the Board, and every time people will try to drive the discussion from the important point about what I said to the useless and personal one as who said it, that there's no way for me, or any other Board member, or staff employee, or anyone related to ICANN to speak on behalf of the organization, as it has President/CEO and Chairman of the Board, who do that. Not amazingly, you start your own email with an "innocent" quick question, pointing exactly in that direction. Could you tell me, on what base whatsoever, you decided that I may be speaking on behalf of ICANN? Now, let's see (without making any alusions about you:) ... At 04:13 PM 5/25/2008 -0400, Robert Guerra wrote:
4. At-Large Advisory Committee
4a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they
relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
- Individual internet users in Egypt are active online (see refs below). To exercise our role, then we need to learn about the regions where internet users are active and bring their comments and opinions to ICANN. Reports and contacts with users in Egypt indicate that issues
of freedom of expression online and censorship are one of their key concerns.
Do you know that someone from Egypt has been banned on discussing issues, related to "the activities of ICANN"? From what you quoted further, you talk about Facebook, which is not an ICANN activity.
I have asked [now numerous times] what (if any) outreach efforts have been developed to engage and recruit ALS's from Egypt and/or the middle
east. Engaging internet users and possible ALS's from Egypt is well within the scope of ALAC's mission.
This is not what you were asking in your original message, where you were talking about something else, and as many people pointed out - not related to the ALAC.
And a way to imitate discussion on a mailing list. As to point 2, do you have experience that people who wanted to attend an ICANN meeting were not allowed to? Do you have information
for censorship of access at inewtrnational meetings in Cairo?
I want to be proactive and seek from ICANN and the organizers of the meeting assurances that the standard practice of allowing for "open registration" and meeting the specifications in the Meetings RFP (see below) in regards to connectivity have been met. I don't want people to complain - after the fact - and given the issues
that "might" arise, I think it prudent to ask well in advance of the meeting taking place.
Well... Don't you have concerns about the quality of the water in the hotel? Or, did you have concerns about the stomach problems in India, and did you ask the local hosts to make sure they wash the salads, and cook at high temperature? And do you have ANY information that registration will be "closed" (as opposed to "open")? Or it is, as I say, an imitation of a discussion?
And do you know how the local host will react to a declaration about
a "problem" which may not even exist for the meeting.
as for issues - i am keen that there not be any. It is well documented that censorship and limitations to freedom of expression exist online in Egypt...
...and this is within the scope of the ALAC, says Robert Guerra from Privaterra.
Or it is only a question of being active on the list?
well - as you can see from the montly stats, i'm not the most active person on here...
I don't know if it is true, but you have the rare capability of starting a non-sense discussion, which might make people not willing to participate at all.
The mission and focus of my ALS - privaterra - is that of providing technical and policy advice to NGOs (particularly human rights and social justice organizations) regarding IT security and internet governance.
Then you have the full right to use Privaterra to do what you want ALAC do. Or, in other words - since you have the means to achieve your goals, why are you trying to achieve them with the help of the ALAC, which has not the same goals as Privaterra. veni _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Hi. As long as we talk about conventions, how about the Geneva conventions ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions ) ? ICANN should treat PoW civilized, and should not use chemical weapons. Of course, one can only wonder how amazingly different topics could be produced on this list, which cause people to waste time to read and respond to them. Privacy issues are quite different in the USA (where they will take your phone number in any grocery "for the discounts card"), in Bulgaria, where social security numbers, SSN, can be found in any federal, regional or municipal institution ( but then, the SSN is of no usage, as there is no working credit card system), or in Canada, or in Denmark or Sweden. Or in China, Australia, South Africa, etc. The problems that are of concern for the American At Large members are not necessarily the ones of concern for the rest of the world. Ah, and let's not forget also the interest of the commercial registrants for their own privacy (and in some cases at the users' expense) Best, Veni On 5/23/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
Before we start making a laundry list of values - let's first review existing statements and values mentioned both by users and At-large. Privacy is such a core value - and I support - Danny's proposal that privacy be added as a core value.
On the topic of additional values - instead of listing individual rights (such as privacy, gender, etc) we might want instead to focus on having ICANN adopt as a key value - a strong endorsement of the international norms such as the Vienna convention on human rights. The logic being, if it wants to act as an international body - they it should adopt and promote rights already agreed to by the international community.
http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.CONF.157.23.En
regards
Robert
On 23-May-08, at 3:26 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Hello Jacqueline, I'll be happy to respond to your query after I receive a response from members of the ALAC. Best wishes, Danny --- "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam@jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:
Hi Danny Not to say I agree or disagree, but I would like to ask - why privacy as a core value and not for example adding gender into core value #4 (functional, geographic, and cultural diversity ) Why is privacy a core value in your opinion? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
Dear members of the ALAC:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I look forward to your comments.
Danny Younger
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Danny Younger wrote:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
Privacy of who? From What? Until the term is specified in those contexts, I will be more than happy to argue AGAINST its inclusion as a core value. And I most certainly oppose the absolute, without limit, protection of privacy. I do not consider protecting the privacy of registrants -- empowering them to hide from those they attack or defraud -- to be a core value. I do not consider protecting privacy, as a shield behind which to slander and defame, to be a core value. And I most certainly do not consider the invokation of privacy to impede transparency within ICANN's own processes to be a core value. As far as I'm concerned, the right of aggrieved Internet users to confront their attackers is at least equal to the right of those attackers to hide after playing hit-and-run.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I oppose any such initiative until we have a more focused idea of what it it we are asking to be respected. Blanket worship of an undefined term "privacy", without bound, offers the potential for as much abuse as it supposes to prevent. - Evan
Hi Evan I asked the same question basically - what's privacy and why should it be a core value. Haven't got an answer yet. Hope your more detailed question will receive a relevant answer. Jacqueline Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Danny Younger wrote:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
Privacy of who? From What?
Until the term is specified in those contexts, I will be more than happy to argue AGAINST its inclusion as a core value. And I most certainly oppose the absolute, without limit, protection of privacy.
I do not consider protecting the privacy of registrants -- empowering them to hide from those they attack or defraud -- to be a core value.
I do not consider protecting privacy, as a shield behind which to slander and defame, to be a core value.
And I most certainly do not consider the invokation of privacy to impede transparency within ICANN's own processes to be a core value.
As far as I'm concerned, the right of aggrieved Internet users to confront their attackers is at least equal to the right of those attackers to hide after playing hit-and-run.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I oppose any such initiative until we have a more focused idea of what it it we are asking to be respected. Blanket worship of an undefined term "privacy", without bound, offers the potential for as much abuse as it supposes to prevent.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Evan, Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. If you require some basic information on privacy rights as they exist in your jurisdiction, please feel free to contact: The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada 112 Kent Street, Ottawa, ON K1A 1H3 www.privcom.gc.ca 1-800-282-1376 best regards, Danny --- Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Danny Younger wrote:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
Privacy of who? From What?
Until the term is specified in those contexts, I will be more than happy to argue AGAINST its inclusion as a core value. And I most certainly oppose the absolute, without limit, protection of privacy.
I do not consider protecting the privacy of registrants -- empowering them to hide from those they attack or defraud -- to be a core value.
I do not consider protecting privacy, as a shield behind which to slander and defame, to be a core value.
And I most certainly do not consider the invokation of privacy to impede transparency within ICANN's own processes to be a core value.
As far as I'm concerned, the right of aggrieved Internet users to confront their attackers is at least equal to the right of those attackers to hide after playing hit-and-run.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I oppose any such initiative until we have a more focused idea of what it it we are asking to be respected. Blanket worship of an undefined term "privacy", without bound, offers the potential for as much abuse as it supposes to prevent.
- Evan
Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. If you require some basic information on privacy rights as they exist in your jurisdiction, please feel free to contact:
Sounds great. So are we agreed that a core value of ICANN should be to protect the privacy of all individual Internet users, without giving preference to the small minority who have registered domains? Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
John, We live in a world where there are competing rights. Your own right to free speech is tempered by laws that prohibit you from maliciously screaming "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre. Within ICANN I think that it's well past time to acknowledge that privacy rights exist, and that they too must be tempered by appropriate policy. regards, Danny --- John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. If you require some basic information on privacy rights as they exist in your jurisdiction, please feel free to contact:
Sounds great. So are we agreed that a core value of ICANN should be to protect the privacy of all individual Internet users, without giving preference to the small minority who have registered domains?
Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
Danny Younger wrote:
John,
We live in a world where there are competing rights. Your own right to free speech is tempered by laws that prohibit you from maliciously screaming "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre.
Within ICANN I think that it's well past time to acknowledge that privacy rights exist, and that they too must be tempered by appropriate policy.
I think it would be useful to start talking about privacy and anonymity separately. For both policy and practical purposes, they are very different. /ross
Danny Younger wrote:
Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other international and regional treaties. If you require some basic information on privacy rights as they exist in your jurisdiction, please feel free to contact:
Please do not patronize me and answer the original issue. You said ICANN as an organization should enshrine privacy in its bylaws, and I said it should not unless that privacy -- and its bounds -- are defined. As the person who raised this, it is your obligation to defend and justify what you want the ICANN Board to do to its bylaws. I am holding you to that obligation, it is not a done deal because the UN says so. By all means, ICANN should abide by the privacy laws of the countries in which it operates, but that is far from defining privacy as its own core value. The UN and Canadian government are not here asking the ICANN board to go beyond simply abiding by appropriate privacy laws. Therefore, you are not entitled to punt to them when challenged. _You_ need to explain why ICANN ought to enshrine ... as a "core value" ... the privacy of those who spam, harrass, cheat and slander, if you intend to convince others to share your initiative. In order to serve the public at large -- our constituency -- ALAC has a role to play in identifying the source of problems as a part of the path to solving those problems. This role is compromised IMO if ICANN obligates itself on principle to protect bad actors beyond the amount required by law. If your only argument is to assert privacy as a sacred concept beyond debate, well then you have no argument and we can move on to other issues. Within ICANN, I have already seen protection of intellectual property rights asserted beyond the bounds of law and international treaty, in a way that (to me) harms the public good. I would not stand by and approve other harm done by sacrificing responsibility in favour of the over-aggressive pursuit of privacy. - Evan
Evan, You will note that the ALAC has taken prior positions with respect to privacy: ALAC Calls for Progress on WHOIS Privacy Date: 29 October, 2003 "In February 2003, the Interim At-Large Advisory Committee issued a formal statement on the issues of WHOIS accuracy and bulk access, <http://alac.icann.org/whois/whois_final_report_accuracy-20feb03.htm>. At the time, we remarked on the privacy concerns raised by the policy mandating that domain name registrants submit accurate and truthful identifying information while giving them no opportunity to protect that information from disclosure or public display. Accuracy was only half the equation, with privacy protections the necessary complement. Although we did not then seek to delay enforcement of accuracy requirements, we recommended that work be commenced swiftly to give registrants more and better privacy options. We concluded that: The Task Force's recommendations to systematically enforce the accuracy of WHOIS data shift the existing balance between the interests of data users and data subjects in favor of data users. In an environment where registrants have perceived "inaccurate" data to be one of the most practical methods for protecting their privacy, this shift of balance is reason for concern. It will inevitably increase the need for privacy protection mechanisms to be built into the contractual framework. Unfortunately, there has been no progress since February. Indeed, on the privacy front, there has been regress. Domain name registrants are forbidden from using pseudonyms or fuzzy, "inaccurate" data in order to protect their privacy, and risk losing their domain name due to "improved" accuracy enforcement. Yet there are no new safeguards or mechanisms by which they can shield their identifying details from disclosure. As many feared at the time the GNSO mandated stricter enforcement of "accuracy" on registrants and registrars, domain name registrants (including members of the at-large public) lose out. The small businessperson working from a home office must list that home address and telephone number, as must the weblogger who wishes to publish at her own domain name. The political dissident who wants to criticize his country's political regime is told to disclose his identity or find a trustworthy friend who is willing to do so instead. Domain names are indisputably a tool of online expression, on an Internet in which individuals can speak alongside corporations and governments, yet many individuals are chilled by the prospect of signing a "speakers' registry" before they can participate fully. Proxy or escrow services, proposed by many as a privacy solution, have not developed to fill the gap. They do not work in practice, giving up the names of their clients on a mere request; and even in theory they are a poor second-best for registrants seeking full control of their identities. The public deserves better. It is time for ICANN to move forward on privacy. One simple solution, requiring no new infrastructure, would be to make all data fields in WHOIS optional, allowing domain name registrants themselves to make the choice between contactability and privacy. A more complete solution would also permit registrants to give accurate information to their registrars without putting that into the generally-accessible WHOIS (the online equivalent of an unlisted telephone number). ICANN owes it to the Internet-using public to complete the equation begun early this year. It should remedy the imbalance between data users and data subjects by allowing registrants to limit data collection and disclosure in domain name registration and WHOIS, and should do so without delay." http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-29oct03.htm
We seem to have some editing errors here.
Unfortunately, there has been no progress since February. Indeed, on the privacy front, there has been regress. Domain name registrants are forbidden from using pseudonyms or fuzzy, "inaccurate" data in order to protect their privacy, and risk losing their domain name due to "improved" accuracy enforcement.
Unfortunately, for the vast majority of at-large users who do not register their own domain names there has been little progress since February. Domain name registrants are forbidden from using pseudonyms or fuzzy, "inaccurate" data in order to hide their identities, and risk losing their domain name due to "improved" accuracy enforcement, although ICANN remains unable or unwilling even to accept the majority of reports of innacurate information.
The small businessperson working from a home office must list that home address and telephone number, as must the weblogger who wishes to publish at her own domain name.
The alleged failures of the current policy are limited to businesses so small that they have neither a post office box nor a business phone number, and bloggers who desire a vanity domain rather than using a subdomain of a well known service.
The political dissident who wants to criticize his country's political regime is told to disclose his identity or find a trustworthy friend who is willing to do so instead.
Oh, and the political dissident who is somehow able to find mail and web hosting that will keep his identity private, yet the hosting company won't handle domain registrations.
Proxy or escrow services, proposed by many as a privacy solution, have not developed to fill the gap. They do not work in practice, giving up the names of their clients on a mere request
Proxy and escrow services have a dismal record of ignoring or stonewalling reports of criminal action by their users, enabling phish and other criminal web sites to remain online for days, weeks, and sometimes months after the allegedly responsible party is notified. Etc. Look, I realize that five years ago the ALAC bought the line that its consituents were individual vanity domain registrants, but it doesn't any more. I entirely realize that individuals have privacy interests, but it's no secret that for every individual who thinks that fudging his whois will avoid telemarketers, there's a thousand crooks. The current proposals, and anything like them, just don't work to protect real individuals in the real world. R's, John
Re: The current proposals, and anything like them, just don't work to protect real individuals in the real world. John, Thank you for making this observation. What would be helpful would be a new initiative, a new proposal, that balances the need for protection with a modicum of respect for privacy. While the GNSO is mired in a set of new WHOIS studies that will doubtless take years to complete, the at-large is in a position to lay out a suitable game plan. We have seen the registrar community endeavor to deal with one set of problems by way of the ill-fated OPoC proposal. Just because that initiative failed doesn't mean that we all need to throw in the towel. Certainly, it should be possible for us to put our heads together and come up with a policy proposal that we all can live with. If we can come to a consensus within the at-large (that clearly holds a number of opposing viewpoints), then there is likely a reasonable chance that such a consensus could carry through to the other stakeholder communities. I'm willing to consider a new effort that could be managed on the At-Large WHOIS WG list. But I'd feel better about moving forward in this direction if we could get some input/cooperation from the actual ALAC members (that for some reason don't seem to be in the participatory habit lately). Are they still on this list? or do we need to write to the CPSR Governance list just to get their attention?
Danny Younger wrote:
What would be helpful would be a new initiative, a new proposal, that balances the need for protection with a modicum of respect for privacy.
Finally, an opening position that reflects common sense and the needs of At-Large ... a far cry from a blanket and vague motherhood demands such as "privacy should be a core value".
If we can come to a consensus within the at-large (that clearly holds a number of opposing viewpoints), then there is likely a reasonable chance that such a consensus could carry through to the other stakeholder communities.
I don't think the viewpoints are really that divergent, and I am optimistic that a balanced position -- not a compromise -- is possible, so long as we avoid hyperbole. I can respect and value privacy so long as it is put in a context of the need for responsibility on the part of sources of Internet content.
I'm willing to consider a new effort that could be managed on the At-Large WHOIS WG list. But I'd feel better about moving forward in this direction if we could get some input/cooperation from the actual ALAC members (that for some reason don't seem to be in the participatory habit lately).
That need not be the case. ALAC is but an executive committee, so to speak. It is not At-Large. Policy initiatives certainly need not wait for ALAC or even RALO initiative. That's what "grassroots" is supposed to be all about. In any case, you're obviously welcome to raise this at the lavel of your local RALO, where people are obviously listening. - Evan
Danny Younger wrote:
What would be helpful would be a new initiative, a new proposal, that balances the need for protection with a modicum of respect for privacy.
I have a modest suggestion to start this in a way consistent with At-Large's mandate and how I think ALAC ought to operate. How about producing an At-Large Policy Brief that outlines the issue and attempts to explain the main conflicting rights/obligations. This brief can then be translated, distributed to ALSs, and at that point ALAC is able to attain a more-accurate picture of the real At-Large view on the matter. It might even (and IMO should be) a Summit topic. - Evan
Danny Younger wrote:
You will note that the ALAC has taken prior positions with respect to privacy:
Oh... you mean the 2003, 100% unaccountable, ALS-free edition of ALAC? As far as I am concerned, that slate is wiped clean. Again, you duck responsibility for justifying what you requested. Please defend your own proposal. In any case, the ALAC statement to which you referred indicates that group's failure to honor its mandate when it commented disapprovingly that:
The Task Force's recommendations to systematically enforce the accuracy of WHOIS data shift the existing balance between the interests of data users and data subjects in favor of data users. This statement should actually have been supported by ALAC, because "data users" comprise the vast bulk of At-Large which have generally been at the short end of ICANN policy.
"Data Subjects" -- with the notable but statistically tiny exception of personal domain owners, whose realm more accurately belongs within NCUC rather than ALAC anyway -- are already well represented within ICANN through multiple constituencies. It was clear dereliction of duty of the 2003 ALAC -- and an even clearer reflection of its earlier, un-representative, unaccountable form -- that it did not aggressively advance and defend the interests of "data users". ALAC exists primarily -- perhaps exclusively -- to advance the interests of "data users" within ICANN. IMO, anyone here who does not believe that is probably in the wrong place. - Evan
I agree with Evan at this stage. A while ago I was accused of fear mongering on this exact issue. Yet hardly had the mails being sent arrived in my mailbox, that I had problems getting a domain that blatantly spoofed a real bank, not only in content but in name as well, cancelled. Emails to the privacy provider yielded no results. Mails to the registrar resulted in a "contact the hosting party" attempt at passing the buck. This response does not acknowledge the fact that fraudulent domains do jump from hoster to hoster. Eventually I emailed the CEO of the registar and privacy provider (same person) and I had to spell out provisions of the RAA. This was after two weeks of to and fro! The Attorney General's office in the same state as the registrar was copied on my emails. The AG's office asked to be updated on the situation since they have encountered similar problems; I quote (Registrar name redacted): "We have gotten a bunch of these in the past. We would be like to kept in the loop on what ****** says about stopping the redirect to the phishing site." Yet this is one of the USA's biggest registrars and my complaint is not unique! Nor are the issues with registrars and privacy providers on proven fraudulent domains unique. Likewise I have another similar bank spoof issue showing another privacy provider in whois that been outstanding for a week now, with absolutely no response. What amazes me is how uncontactable these privacy providers can be. Contact via the supplied online form yields slow and inaccurate responses. No other contact details are available on the webpages for the privacy provider. As such the logical fallback is the whois details. However: ** Telephone number in whois yields a voice mail to use the online forms. ** Whois shows a postal address, but says postal emails will not be accepted (which is in another country to the telephone number). ** email address in whois asks to use the online form. Yet the domains protected are scam and fraudulent domains, proven as such to the privacy providers. I know the system better than the average person on the street. How much of a chance does the average person on the street have to enforce their rights if they are scammed. Go figure. Consider this: - We are all experts here compared to the average user out there. If we feel threatened exposing ourselves on the internet, how much more so is the normal internet user at risk in reality? - How many registrants vs ordinary internet users are there? The privacy issue plays off the one party against the other. - Can we really rely on law enforcement to investigate each and every domain that is used to scam somebody? If not, who will the party be that does this and how will the parties that do obtain whois data? Being a domain registrant myself, my attitude is that before I allow hundreds of innocents to be targeted, I will rather protect myself by other means. Until checks and balances are fundamental to all privacy mechanisms, we simply cannot afford blanket privacy protection as we will simply be aggravating current domain abuse issues. A such privacy as a core value must be measured against the safety of all internet users. One of the most effective forms of protection when doing business with a party via a website or such form of Internet interaction is doing a whois lookup and deciding for myself that an addresses such as the following being fake or not: - FEDEXDELIVERYSERVICEONLINE.COM Registrant: xdeliveryserv Dorothy Miller (**** <at> hotmail.com) 8870 Brentford Ave San Diego ACT,92126 AU Tel. +61.221256556 - PRISEGIVERS.COM Registrant: prisegivers JODI DANNER (***** <at> hotmail.com) 112 N OMAHA AVE SIOUX FALLS ACT,57103 AU Tel. +61.2535251156 Depriving me of this information put me at severe risk, yet is the safety of all also not a human right? Derek Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Danny Younger wrote:
As you may be aware, privacy is not an ICANN "Core Value". The word "privacy" does not appear within the bylaws. I am of the view that ICANN would be well served by articulating that it respects privacy.
Privacy of who? From What?
Until the term is specified in those contexts, I will be more than happy to argue AGAINST its inclusion as a core value. And I most certainly oppose the absolute, without limit, protection of privacy.
I do not consider protecting the privacy of registrants -- empowering them to hide from those they attack or defraud -- to be a core value.
I do not consider protecting privacy, as a shield behind which to slander and defame, to be a core value.
And I most certainly do not consider the invokation of privacy to impede transparency within ICANN's own processes to be a core value.
As far as I'm concerned, the right of aggrieved Internet users to confront their attackers is at least equal to the right of those attackers to hide after playing hit-and-run.
If we ultimately seek to arrive at a consensus on the fundamental issue of protection of personal privacy, we need to have a starting point to stimulate ICANN-wide discussion. Accordingly, I am asking you to drive home this point by petitioning the ICANN Board to amend its core values section in the bylaws so that privacy may come to be acknowledged as a value to be respected.
I oppose any such initiative until we have a more focused idea of what it it we are asking to be respected. Blanket worship of an undefined term "privacy", without bound, offers the potential for as much abuse as it supposes to prevent.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
I'd support Danny in this quite happily. The counter-arguments that have been raised all work on the basis that privacy equates with privacy providers. That doesn't have to be the case. If you register a .ie, co.uk or a .eu you are granted a degree of privacy be default in line with EU legislation. That does not mean that a criminal can hide. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Tel. 1850 929 929 Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
participants (17)
-
Adam Peake -
Danny Younger -
Derek Smythe -
Dominik Filipp -
Evan Leibovitch -
Jacqueline A. Morris -
JFC Morfin -
John Levine -
Michele Neylon -
Mohamed EL Bashir -
Patrick Vande Walle -
Robert Guerra -
Ross Rader -
Siavash Shahshahani -
Veni Markovski -
Wendy Seltzer -
WWWhatsup