Something of actual importance to end-users
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56
Wait so we DO care about registrants?! ;) Seriously, we just assigned two people to read the agreement, yesterday, and report back to the CPWG. Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 12:12:27 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56
TBH I care less about the registrants in this matter than about end-users being denied access to important Internet destinations. There is also a related issue here in that the rationale for this measure is to remove domains engaging in end-user abuse (phishing, malware, etc) and illegal activity. So perhaps the proposed change may be desirable in principle but flawed in execution. Anyway, thanks for getting involved in it. - Evan On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 1:22 PM Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Wait so we DO care about registrants?! ;)
Seriously, we just assigned two people to read the agreement, yesterday, and report back to the CPWG.
*Jonathan Zuck* *Director*, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org
------------------------------ *From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 12:12:27 PM *To:* CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul...
Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government.
BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve.
Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hello Evan, As one of the two people assigned to do an initial review of the .NET agreement, I welcome you to attend next Wednesday's CPWG call where Bill and I be providing a review of our initial findings and whether ALAC should move forward with a formal response. It is kind of a beefy document as I am only on page 3 of 72 of the redline I prepared referencing the .NET to the baseline gTLD registry document. My personal initial concern is that every other legacy operator has migrated toward the new baseline registry agreement, yet ICANN is permitting Verisign to mark up an old .NET agreement. It makes it very hard for the community to track changes in contracts that deviate from the baseline. Unfortunately, ICANN only provided a redline of the old .NET not a red line to the baseline. Look forward to having you participate in next Wednesday's call. The more eyes on deck the better. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 1:22 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Wait so we DO care about registrants?! ;) Seriously, we just assigned two people to read the agreement, yesterday, and report back to the CPWG. Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 12:12:27 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56
Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote:
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul...
Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government.
BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve.
Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then.
He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote:
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul...
Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government.
BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve.
Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any "outcry" and therefore your statement that you "look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members", is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don't appreciate your sentiment of "hating domainers". It's not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John's statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net - I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Jonathan, Perhaps you may want to stick to making your short films. You are much more in your comedic swim lane with that content 😊 Are there any recent videos that you can share? They always seem to bring a smile to my face, although your short western is still my all-time favorite. Best regards, Michael From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:42 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
My comedy is broadly funny Mike! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:47:14 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, Perhaps you may want to stick to making your short films. You are much more in your comedic swim lane with that content ?? Are there any recent videos that you can share? They always seem to bring a smile to my face, although your short western is still my all-time favorite. Best regards, Michael From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:42 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear All, In my humble opinion, we need to look at the lighter side as well in the context of End - Users. This category brings along with it the following characteristics. Misstated financial statements due to simple data entry or calculation errors in spreadsheets Regulatory and compliance violations Operational impacts and losses due to errors Loss of time stemming from cumbersome manual processes and calculations that could be automated Data redundancy and version control Lack of recovery or forensic capabilities Higher risk of fraud Redoubtable Audit findings due to lack of control The serious challenges are: #1: Technology Push to address these concerns is not viable due to economic reasons. The End - Users would be with very limited technology options that are several notches below the bleeding - edge ones. #2: Stern Regulatory measures such as the ones being hinted are likely to be counter - productive. Admittedly, the dumb machines and devices reached the end-users much faster than anyone ever expected. A methodology to educate them in that many numbers is frankly beyond my ken at the moment. Persuasiveness and Negotiations are on the top of the stack in my mind. Your thoughts.. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 21 April 2023 02:23 To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users My comedy is broadly funny Mike! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org ________________________________ From: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:47:14 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, Perhaps you may want to stick to making your short films. You are much more in your comedic swim lane with that content ?? Are there any recent videos that you can share? They always seem to bring a smile to my face, although your short western is still my all-time favorite. Best regards, Michael From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:42 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
I agree with everything said. But I ask: who is the end user? I once argued with the CEO of ICANN (Fadi) when he said: "We are all end users." And I replied: it is partially true, but I believe that within ICANN we are all end users with knowledge of all Internet regulations, of our rights and obligations. But we should consider as an end user who is unaware of all this, and therefore, does not have the capacity to fight and demand for their rights. And we end users in the ALS-RALO-ALAC path are responsible for taking concerns and problems to the ICANN board of directors and proposing the necessary solutions for the "end user". Otherwise, only the opinion of the representatives of the ALA-RALO-ALAC will reach the Junta Dieciva, and not of the "end users". Best Alberto De: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> En nombre de gopal via CPWG Enviado el: jueves, 20 de abril de 2023 19:08 Para: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Asunto: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Dear All, In my humble opinion, we need to look at the lighter side as well in the context of End - Users. This category brings along with it the following characteristics. Misstated financial statements due to simple data entry or calculation errors in spreadsheets Regulatory and compliance violations Operational impacts and losses due to errors Loss of time stemming from cumbersome manual processes and calculations that could be automated Data redundancy and version control Lack of recovery or forensic capabilities Higher risk of fraud Redoubtable Audit findings due to lack of control The serious challenges are: #1: Technology Push to address these concerns is not viable due to economic reasons. The End - Users would be with very limited technology options that are several notches below the bleeding - edge ones. #2: Stern Regulatory measures such as the ones being hinted are likely to be counter - productive. Admittedly, the dumb machines and devices reached the end-users much faster than anyone ever expected. A methodology to educate them in that many numbers is frankly beyond my ken at the moment. Persuasiveness and Negotiations are on the top of the stack in my mind. Your thoughts.. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 <https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545> https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 <https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli> https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _____ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Sent: 21 April 2023 02:23 To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users My comedy is broadly funny Mike! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org <http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> _____ From: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:47:14 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> >; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, Perhaps you may want to stick to making your short films. You are much more in your comedic swim lane with that content 😊 Are there any recent videos that you can share? They always seem to bring a smile to my face, although your short western is still my all-time favorite. Best regards, Michael From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:42 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> >; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org <http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> _____ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> >; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> zak@muscovitch.com 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 <http://www.trademarks-canada.com/> http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ <https://www.muscovitch.com/> https://www.muscovitch.com/ <https://dnattorney.com/> https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> >; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org <http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> _____ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com <mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org <mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> >; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA _____ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com <mailto:mike@palage.com> >; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org <http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> _____ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com> >; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org <mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org <mailto:evan@telly.org> >; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Thank you Alberto Soto Roland for the query "Who is End - User"? To my mind, unless Localization and Local Language are factored, a specification of "End - User" would be elusive. If I can use Technology without Blaming Technology then I may be ranked better than End - User. We all owe a professional responsibility for this rapidly increasing segment of End - Users". I have been looking upto ICANN for the umbrella term "Geopolitics" from the technology basis. Your thoughts are most welcome. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: Alberto Soto Roldan <alberto@soto.net.ar> Sent: 21 April 2023 10:24 To: gopal <gopal@annauniv.edu>; 'CPWG' <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users You don't often get email from alberto@soto.net.ar. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> I agree with everything said. But I ask: who is the end user? I once argued with the CEO of ICANN (Fadi) when he said: "We are all end users." And I replied: it is partially true, but I believe that within ICANN we are all end users with knowledge of all Internet regulations, of our rights and obligations. But we should consider as an end user who is unaware of all this, and therefore, does not have the capacity to fight and demand for their rights. And we end users in the ALS-RALO-ALAC path are responsible for taking concerns and problems to the ICANN board of directors and proposing the necessary solutions for the "end user". Otherwise, only the opinion of the representatives of the ALA-RALO-ALAC will reach the Junta Dieciva, and not of the "end users". Best Alberto De: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> En nombre de gopal via CPWG Enviado el: jueves, 20 de abril de 2023 19:08 Para: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Asunto: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Dear All, In my humble opinion, we need to look at the lighter side as well in the context of End - Users. This category brings along with it the following characteristics. Misstated financial statements due to simple data entry or calculation errors in spreadsheets Regulatory and compliance violations Operational impacts and losses due to errors Loss of time stemming from cumbersome manual processes and calculations that could be automated Data redundancy and version control Lack of recovery or forensic capabilities Higher risk of fraud Redoubtable Audit findings due to lack of control The serious challenges are: #1: Technology Push to address these concerns is not viable due to economic reasons. The End - Users would be with very limited technology options that are several notches below the bleeding - edge ones. #2: Stern Regulatory measures such as the ones being hinted are likely to be counter - productive. Admittedly, the dumb machines and devices reached the end-users much faster than anyone ever expected. A methodology to educate them in that many numbers is frankly beyond my ken at the moment. Persuasiveness and Negotiations are on the top of the stack in my mind. Your thoughts.. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: 21 April 2023 02:23 To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users My comedy is broadly funny Mike! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:47:14 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, Perhaps you may want to stick to making your short films. You are much more in your comedic swim lane with that content ?? Are there any recent videos that you can share? They always seem to bring a smile to my face, although your short western is still my all-time favorite. Best regards, Michael From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:42 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh, sorry about that. I thought George was one of yours. I suppose no one really wants to take responsibility for him. Honestly, I was really just trying to tease Evan. J Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:36:47 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: RE: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Your apology is accepted. Please note however, that it was not a member of the ICA who made any “outcry” and therefore your statement that you “look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members”, is factually incorrect. Yours truly, Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA Muscovitch Law P.C. zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com> 1-866-654-7129 416-924-5084 http://www.trademarks-canada.com/ https://www.muscovitch.com/ https://dnattorney.com/ From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:28 PM To: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Oh Hi Zak. Been a minute. Sorry, I was really just trying to make a joke and engaged in some hyperbole...perhaps a bit like the domain industry does when their interests are at stake...but that's neither here nor there. No real offense intended. I look forward to ICA's civil and rational evaluation of this outcry by one of its members. Jonathan Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: Zak Muscovitch <zak@muscovitch.com<mailto:zak@muscovitch.com>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:19:33 PM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization. Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM To: mike palage.com <mike@palage.com<mailto:mike@palage.com>>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order. For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them! Jonathan Zuck Director, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM To: Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Hello Olivier, Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list. That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry. Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules. Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations: 1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail address; 2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view; 3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose. Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT The Registrant represents and warrants that: 1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar; 2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate; 3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party; 4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful; 5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules. Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct. Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns. Best regards, Michael From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org<mailto:evan@telly.org>>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2... On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote: Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then. He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote: https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul... Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government. BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve. Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters? Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @evanleibovitch / @el56 _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Sigh. Where did domainers come into this? That indeed seemed like a needless cheap shot. As I said before, our role here is to approach this from the PoV of end-users and potential denial of access to what may be controversial content. I really don't care about the effects on registrants since they have constituencies within ICANN that are fully capable of defending their own interests. There is every possibility that these changes are in line with other agreements, or that they simply acknowledge authority that already exists. What is unclear to me is whether a government in country A can issue a takedown order for a domain owned in country B that may be breaking the law in A but not B. (for example, as calling a war a "war" outside Russia) As a fledgling YouTube creator I am very aware of the abuse of well-meaning takedown regulations there, so I am alerted when I see allegations of new takedown regulations anywhere. Maybe it is indeed nothing, but I am uninclined to summarily dismiss it as Jonathan has without a review from those who can read the changes with a keener eye than my own. I am delighted to see Mike on the case and now have increased confidence that the issue will receive the necessary attention. - Evan On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 4:20 PM Zak Muscovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Jonathan, I don’t appreciate your sentiment of “hating domainers”. It’s not conducive to civil discussion amongst stakeholders, and in any event it is an overly broad generalization without justification. Moreover, attributing Evan's concern to being "spun up by domainers" is another unjustified generalization.
Zak Muscovitch General Counsel, ICA
------------------------------ *From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 4:12 PM *To:* mike palage.com <mike@palage.com>; Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
Yeah, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like some contract can give a government permission to seize a domain. Sigh. This is just so ICANN can't come after Verisign ( and PIR etc) for accommodating a court order.
For someone who hates the domainers, even more than me, Evan is sure spun up by them!
*Jonathan Zuck* *Director*, Future of Work Project Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org
------------------------------ *From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:56:38 PM *To:* Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>; Evan Leibovitch < evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
Hello Olivier,
Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list.
That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry.
Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf
Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain
Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules.
Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT
Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations:
1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail
address;
2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view;
3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose.
Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT
The Registrant represents and warrants that:
1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar;
2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate;
3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party;
4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful;
5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules.
Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct.
Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns.
Best regards,
Michael
*From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM *To:* Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
Forgot the reference:
https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2...
On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then.
He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote:
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul...
Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government.
BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve.
Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters?
Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
@evanleibovitch / @el56
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Mike, the discussion was a brief one, on the ISOC policy mailing list. A question asked was "should PIR comment", and the response was that a Registry usually does not comment on another Registry's Registry agreement. Andrew Sullivan directed the discussion to go to the ICANN Public Comment. Kindest regards, Olivier On 20/04/2023 20:56, mike palage.com wrote:
Hello Olivier,
Can you provide a public reference to the thread or email list? I am a sucker for subscribing to a good mailing list.
That being said I would agree with John’s statement. As someone who has consulted with many registry operators over the last two decades, the language in the .COM and the now proposed .NET registry agreement is not inconsistent with standards provisions across the industry.
Sadly, ICANN only requires Verisign to post its Registry/Registrar agreements. However, I was able to quickly find this legal provision from EURid in connection with .EU registrations, see https://eurid.eu/d/7556497/Terms_and_Conditions_EN.pdf
Section 6.4 - The Registry shall be entitled to immediately suspend or cancel the Domain
Name when the Registrant is in breach of the Rules.
Section 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT
Throughout the Term, the Registrant has the following obligations:
1. As referred to in the Registration Policy, to keep its contact information accurate, complete, and up-to-date, both (i) with the Registrar with whom the Registrant has entered into an Agreement and (ii) with the Registry (via the Registrar). Moreover, the Registrant represents and warrants that any email address communicated to the Registry shall be a functioning e-mail
address;
2. To use the Domain Name in such a way that does not violate any third-party rights, applicable laws, or regulations, including discrimination on the basis of race, language, sex, religion, or political view;
3. Not to use the Domain Name (i) in bad faith or (ii) for any unlawful purpose.
Section 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE REGISTRANT
The Registrant represents and warrants that:
1. it meets the Eligibility Criteria, and it shall inform the Registry when it ceases to meet such conditions via its Registrar;
2. all information provided to the Registry during the Domain Name registration process is true, complete, and accurate;
3. the Domain Name registration is made in good faith, for a lawful purpose, and does not infringe the rights of any third party;
4. the Domain Name is not contrary to public policy or morality (e.g. is not obscene or offensive), and is not unlawful;
5. throughout the Term, it shall abide by these Terms and Conditions and any and all applicable Rules.
Therefore while the Verisign lawyers were a bit verbose our friends at EURid were much more succinct.
Net Net – I personally am not losing any sleep over the proposed mark-up to the RRA. That being said there are A LOT of other provisions in the existing/proposed .NET agreement that are giving me angst, so please tune in next Wednesday when Bill and I share our initial assessment and concerns.
Best regards,
Michael
*From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> *On Behalf Of * Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond via CPWG *Sent:* Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:28 PM *To:* Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>; CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] Something of actual importance to end-users
Forgot the reference: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/com/com-amend-3-pdf-2...
On 20/04/2023 20:26, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
Worth noting: John Levine points out on another mailing list that the changes are the same as those already integrated in the .COM Registry Agreement 3 years ago and that did not cause as many ripples back then.
He also mentions that governments seize gTLD domains all the time when they get a suitable court order. But of course I guess this is all in the details.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 20/04/2023 17:12, Evan Leibovitch via CPWG wrote:
https://freespeech.com/2023/04/19/red-alert-icann-and-verisign-proposal-woul...
Let's briefly put aside the boasting about ALAC's incremental involvement in the trivial agendas set by ICANN's vested interests. Here's a real example of an issue that can negatively affect end-users. The aims of the proposed modification may be laudable, but there's too much room for arbitrariness and too much potential to curb political speech unwanted by a government.
BTW ... Why was this not already flagged by ALAC as cause for concern? Why did I have to find out about this in the media rather than from the inside. Was ALAC intending to ignore it?
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. ALAC is obsessed with the trivial and the self-absorbed, but asleep during the issues that actually affect the constituency we're supposed to serve.
Does ALAC have what it takes to fight for the public interest on something that actually matters?
Is it capable of balancing the various intertwining issues? If the CPWG meets on this issue I'll be there.
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
@evanleibovitch / @el56
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (7)
-
Alberto Soto Roldan -
Evan Leibovitch -
gopal -
Jonathan Zuck -
mike palage.com -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Zak Muscovitch