Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] [FWD: RE: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Discussion on Domain Names Registered Using Private/Proxy Services / 14.12.09 @ 18:00 UTC]
Karl, you wrote: "well established legal due processes and protections." And in the case of a Russian-mob operated chain of sites that sell vicodin (or a version thereof) all over the world to anyone who will pay, using registrations obtained in the US with false WHOIS data, where exactly is the "well established legal due processes and protections"? No-one's talking about medical marijuana in California. This is about (among other types of drugs), Class IV controlled substances. Note that "The United States is a party to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, designed to establish effective control over international and domestic traffic in narcotics, coca leaf, cocaine, and cannabis. A second treaty, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, which entered into force in 1976, is designed to establish comparable control over stimulants, depressants, and hallucinogens. Congress ratified this treaty in 1980." (http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/1-csa.htm) You also wrote: "ICANN is being used as a private hired gun through which everyone from the trademark industry to "consumer advocates" are trying to create an e-vigilante shortcut" Nice, though rather dated, rhetorical flourish, but I think we are talking about encouraging the contracted-party-dominated ICANN community to abide by and enforce its own policies or contractual provisions on WHOIS data. Once you've looked at the umpteenth one of these types of sites protected by private proxy registration, you get a little bit discouraged. I don't know if the trademark industry is paying ICANN's "hired gun" fee, but I can assure you we "consumer advocates" ain't got the money between us to rent a margarita machine for an afternoon. Beau -----Original Message-----
From: Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> Sent: Dec 14, 2009 6:47 PM To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] [FWD: RE: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Discussion on Domain Names Registered Using Private/Proxy Services / 14.12.09 @ 18:00 UTC]
On 12/14/2009 03:05 PM, James Seng wrote:
Sorry for not able to attend the call (its 2am on my side) but is there a summary of the meeting or transcript available? I am interested in the ALAC position on privacy statement.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Discussion on Domain Names Registered Using Private/Proxy Services / 14.12.09 @ 18:00 UTC From: "Garth Bruen at KnujOn"<gbruen@knujon.com> Date: Mon, December 14, 2009 1:55 pm
In advance of today's policy discussion I have prepared this brief report of abuse of privacy/proxy services by illicit pharmacies.
I find this jump-to-conclusion approach to be very disturbing.
What criteria are used to say that a pharmacy is "illicit"?
Here in Santa Cruz there are "medical marijuana" clinics that are 100% lawful under California State law but 100% unlawful under US Federal law. ICANN is in no position to undertake to distinguish "licit" from "illicit".
And what criteria is used to say that a business is in "abuse of privacy/proxy services"?
It is often 100% lawful for people and corporations to not hang the identities of their operators on a shingle beyond a minimal contact for the receipt of legal process.
It really concerns me that ICANN is being used as a private hired gun through which everyone from the trademark industry to "consumer advocates" are trying to create an e-vigilante shortcut past well established legal due processes and protections.
--karl--
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
On 12/15/2009 07:51 AM, Beau Brendler wrote:
Karl, you wrote:
"well established legal due processes and protections."
And in the case of a Russian-mob operated chain of sites that sell vicodin (or a version thereof) all over the world to anyone who will pay, using registrations obtained in the US with false WHOIS data, where exactly is the "well established legal due processes and protections"?
If you think the activity is illicit then make a complaint to law enforcement. Don't turn ICANN into the Protocol Police.
You also wrote:
"ICANN is being used as a private hired gun through which everyone from the trademark industry to "consumer advocates" are trying to create an e-vigilante shortcut"
Nice, though rather dated, rhetorical flourish,
Should I have said "iVigilante"? but I think we are
talking about encouraging the contracted-party-dominated ICANN community to abide by and enforce its own policies or contractual provisions on WHOIS data.
There is certainly no agreement that whois is even a valid system at all. It is a system that has nearly zero technical operational value and exists only because it is a carry-forward of the kind of club-roster that we used back in the early 1970's. If you want to create a system of internet business licenses, feel free to propose it. Once you've looked at the umpteenth one of
these types of sites protected by private proxy registration, you get a little bit discouraged.
That's why law enforcement has investigatory powers, but those powers are subject to a body of due-process constraints. There is much danger is allowing the kind of power to an actor, such as ICANN, that is not constrained by due process or ill equipped to act as a private law enforcement body - just look at Xe, nee Blackwater. For instance, there are a lot of scientology folks out there who would love for you to succeed in your endeavor - because next year they will follow the road you are creating to have ICANN locate and punish noisy skeptics. And some of the highly radical anti-abortion crowd would just love to use ICANN to find the personal information about certain doctors and their staff. ICANN's role is to assure that the internet domain name system is stable, meaning that DNS query packets are accurately, quickly, and reliably turned into DNS response packets. We already have law enforcement and consumer protection agencies with powers and procedures to deal with the issue you raise. If they are not solving the problem you perceive, then fix them. But don't break ICANN. --karl--
"well established legal due processes and protections."
And in the case of a Russian-mob operated chain of sites that sell vicodin (or a version thereof) all over the world to anyone who will pay, using registrations obtained in the US with false WHOIS data, where exactly is the "well established legal due processes and protections"? No-one's talking about medical marijuana in California. This is about (among other types of drugs), Class IV controlled substances. Note that "The United States is a party to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, designed to establish effective control over international and domestic traffic in narcotics, coca leaf, cocaine, and cannabis. A second treaty, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, which entered into force in 1976, is designed to establish comparable control over stimulants, depressants, and hallucinogens. Congress ratified this treaty in 1980." (http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/1-csa.htm)
Why anyone would care to read all this stuff on a ICANN's email list ? While somehow I find the Whois issue related to ICANN's agreements with the contracted parties providing name registration services, determining that the use of a domain name is illicit or being used for any illicit purpose is way outside the scope and mandate of ICANN. We should frame the discussion in the appropriate context if there is one. My .02 Jorge
participants (3)
-
Beau Brendler -
Jorge Amodio -
Karl Auerbach