-- Dear Jaqueline, do you plan to send out the public forum presentation so we can make comments on it? These are my proposals of what you should mention in the PF concerning city TLDs ALAC ran a very interesting workshop together with NCUC on Geo TLDs. We heard, that user confusion seems not to be a big concern. We would like to stress that taking the example of city TLDs they give a great opportunity for users. More choice, the possibility of identification with your region/city, good opportunities for local business. What has to be considered are rights of governments to register governmental domains, so not other people will get those names, trademarks will be dealt with in a sunrise period - the usual stuff. A local geographical and unrestricted (!) domain is a very useful addition to the excisting TLDs for the users. Annette
I just finished it and sent it - but I will include this on gTLDs -----Original Message----- From: Annette Muehlberg [mailto:Annette.Muehlberg@web.de] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 6:37 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: public forum -- Dear Jaqueline, do you plan to send out the public forum presentation so we can make comments on it? These are my proposals of what you should mention in the PF concerning city TLDs ALAC ran a very interesting workshop together with NCUC on Geo TLDs. We heard, that user confusion seems not to be a big concern. We would like to stress that taking the example of city TLDs they give a great opportunity for users. More choice, the possibility of identification with your region/city, good opportunities for local business. What has to be considered are rights of governments to register governmental domains, so not other people will get those names, trademarks will be dealt with in a sunrise period - the usual stuff. A local geographical and unrestricted (!) domain is a very useful addition to the excisting TLDs for the users. Annette No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM
For the ALAC/NCUC free expression workshop, it would be good to mention that ALAC co-sponsored a workshop on free expression in gTLD policy. Speakers on the panel commented that ICANN should stick to its thin, technical mission, and keep policy decisions out of the core. Trademark, which deals with territorial limits and classes of goods and services, is not a direct match with TLD strings, while concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions. Attempting to harmonize those restriction requests in gTLD policy will result in a race to the bottom that prevents innovators from experimenting and enhancing the network's value in unexpected ways, speakers suggested. Thanks, --Wendy Annette Muehlberg wrote:
Dear Jaqueline, do you plan to send out the public forum presentation so we can make comments on it?
These are my proposals of what you should mention in the PF concerning city TLDs
ALAC ran a very interesting workshop together with NCUC on Geo TLDs. We heard, that user confusion seems not to be a big concern.
We would like to stress that taking the example of city TLDs they give a great opportunity for users. More choice, the possibility of identification with your region/city, good opportunities for local business. What has to be considered are rights of governments to register governmental domains, so not other people will get those names, trademarks will be dealt with in a sunrise period - the usual stuff. A local geographical and unrestricted (!) domain is a very useful addition to the excisting TLDs for the users.
Annette
________________
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
Thanks Will include JAM -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Seltzer [mailto:wendy@seltzer.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 7:19 PM To: Annette Muehlberg Cc: jam@jacquelinemorris.com; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum For the ALAC/NCUC free expression workshop, it would be good to mention that ALAC co-sponsored a workshop on free expression in gTLD policy. Speakers on the panel commented that ICANN should stick to its thin, technical mission, and keep policy decisions out of the core. Trademark, which deals with territorial limits and classes of goods and services, is not a direct match with TLD strings, while concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions. Attempting to harmonize those restriction requests in gTLD policy will result in a race to the bottom that prevents innovators from experimenting and enhancing the network's value in unexpected ways, speakers suggested. Thanks, --Wendy Annette Muehlberg wrote:
Dear Jaqueline, do you plan to send out the public forum presentation so we can make comments on it?
These are my proposals of what you should mention in the PF concerning city TLDs
ALAC ran a very interesting workshop together with NCUC on Geo TLDs. We heard, that user confusion seems not to be a big concern.
We would like to stress that taking the example of city TLDs they give a great opportunity for users. More choice, the possibility of identification with your region/city, good opportunities for local business. What has to be considered are rights of governments to register governmental domains, so not other people will get those names, trademarks will be dealt with in a sunrise period - the usual stuff. A local geographical and unrestricted (!) domain is a very useful addition to the excisting TLDs for the users.
Annette
________________
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM
Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------
Point taken JAM -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together. The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body. In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs: Draft "ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process." Hong On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:
Point taken JAM
-----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto: vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum
Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
_______________________________________________ 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://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
there's now the open mike, you might consider a statement there to point out the importance of IDN for AtLarge. I believe that we are also taking remote comments. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Hong Xue Sent: 28 June 2007 08:50 To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together. The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body. In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs: Draft "ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process." Hong On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com <mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com> > wrote: Point taken JAM -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto: vb@bertola.eu <mailto:vb@bertola.eu> ] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g> At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org <http://www.alac.icann.org/> ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org <http://www.icannalac.org/>
Many thanks, Roberto. Indeed, we should. Hong On 6/28/07, Roberto Gaetano <roberto@icann.org> wrote:
there's now the open mike, you might consider a statement there to point out the importance of IDN for AtLarge. I believe that we are also taking remote comments. Cheers, Roberto
------------------------------ *From:* alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Hong Xue *Sent:* 28 June 2007 08:50 *To:* jam@jacquelinemorris.com *Cc:* alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org *Subject:* Re: [At-Large] public forum
IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together.
The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body.
In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs:
Draft
"ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process."
Hong
On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com > wrote:
Point taken JAM
-----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto: vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum
Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions
of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions
of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we
should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
_______________________________________________ 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://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
Hi Roberto I read out most of Hong’s comment in the ALAC report… should we go again with it? Maybe some background? JAM From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:18 AM To: 'Hong Xue'; jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum there's now the open mike, you might consider a statement there to point out the importance of IDN for AtLarge. I believe that we are also taking remote comments. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Hong Xue Sent: 28 June 2007 08:50 To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together. The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body. In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs: Draft "ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process." Hong On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <HYPERLINK "mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com" \njam@jacquelinemorris.com > wrote: Point taken JAM -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:HYPERLINK "mailto:vb@bertola.eu" \n vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: HYPERLINK "mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com" \njam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: HYPERLINK "mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nalac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at HYPERLINK "http://bertola.eu/" \nhttp://bertola.eu/ <-------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list HYPERLINK "mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org HYPERLINK "http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g" \nhttp://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o rg At-Large Official Site: HYPERLINK "http://www.alac.icann.org/" \nhttp://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: HYPERLINK "http://www.icannalac.org/" \nhttp://www.icannalac.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
I was just suggesting that, by experience, a specific comment from the floor (or from the outside) is listened to much more tham an item in a long report. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com] Sent: 28 June 2007 10:40 To: 'Roberto Gaetano'; 'Hong Xue' Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum Hi Roberto I read out most of Hong's comment in the ALAC report. should we go again with it? Maybe some background? JAM From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:18 AM To: 'Hong Xue'; jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum there's now the open mike, you might consider a statement there to point out the importance of IDN for AtLarge. I believe that we are also taking remote comments. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Hong Xue Sent: 28 June 2007 08:50 To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together. The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body. In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs: Draft "ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process." Hong On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com <mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com> > wrote: Point taken JAM -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto: vb@bertola.eu <mailto:vb@bertola.eu> ] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g> At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org <http://www.alac.icann.org/> ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org <http://www.icannalac.org/> No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
Got it – she did go up From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:54 PM To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com; 'Hong Xue' Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum I was just suggesting that, by experience, a specific comment from the floor (or from the outside) is listened to much more tham an item in a long report. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com] Sent: 28 June 2007 10:40 To: 'Roberto Gaetano'; 'Hong Xue' Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum Hi Roberto I read out most of Hong’s comment in the ALAC report… should we go again with it? Maybe some background? JAM From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto@icann.org] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:18 AM To: 'Hong Xue'; jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: RE: [At-Large] public forum there's now the open mike, you might consider a statement there to point out the importance of IDN for AtLarge. I believe that we are also taking remote comments. Cheers, Roberto _____ From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Hong Xue Sent: 28 June 2007 08:50 To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum IDN PAC had an important meeting that brings the Rep.s of all the constituencies (Board, ccNSO, gNSO, GAC, ALAC and technical experts) together. The PAC has transferred from the pure technical supervision into a high-level policy coordinative forum. Cerf is now asking GNSO to be aware of the CCNSO IDN policy development in the new gtld process. We should strengthen our participation in this important body. In the public forum, if Jacqueline has sometime, we may briefly mention the IDNs: Draft "ALAC welcomes the new technical and policy developments on IDN. ALAC supports a balanced and reasonable fast-tracking approach on the IDN implementation, and we call for a more effective and formal consultant mechanism with the Internet user community in all the IDN process." Hong On 6/28/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <HYPERLINK "mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com" \njam@jacquelinemorris.com > wrote: Point taken JAM -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:HYPERLINK "mailto:vb@bertola.eu" \n vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:28 PM To: HYPERLINK "mailto:jam@jacquelinemorris.com" \njam@jacquelinemorris.com Cc: HYPERLINK "mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nalac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] public forum Jacqueline A. Morris ha scritto:
Thanks Will include
I don't want to be picky, but some of us were at the workshop, and both I and Annette expressed some disagreement (personally) with the opinions of the panelists, for example suggesting that this point:
concerns of morality and appropriateness are better left to governments to manage in their own jurisdictions.
might actually lead to more censorship, nor less, encouraging countries to resort to national filters to prevent certain TLDs from being accessed by their citizens. In any case, I don't think that the opinions of the panelists represent an ALAC position, to be stated in public tomorrow, on a matter we never discussed: it's fine to report that we co-organized a workshop, but for what regards substance we should be exposing our collective opinions, not someone else's. So I think that we should rather work out a collective statement on the proposed new gTLD process, in the next few weeks, and stand by whatever common agreement we reach. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at HYPERLINK "http://bertola.eu/" \nhttp://bertola.eu/ <-------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007 11:54 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list HYPERLINK "mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org" \nALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org HYPERLINK "http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.or g" \nhttp://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.o rg At-Large Official Site: HYPERLINK "http://www.alac.icann.org/" \nhttp://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: HYPERLINK "http://www.icannalac.org/" \nhttp://www.icannalac.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/875 - Release Date: 6/27/2007 9:08 PM
participants (6)
-
Annette Muehlberg -
Hong Xue -
Jacqueline A. Morris -
Roberto Gaetano -
Vittorio Bertola -
Wendy Seltzer