June 2008 - NA-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review
by Evan Leibovitch Sept. 22, 2008

Sept. 22, 2008

NOTE: This is a draft, produced as a result of interest expressed in my earlier query of this list. Even though it says "reached by consensus", that of course will not be the case if we do not reach consensus. Please -- SOON -- offer changes of any kind as well as any other comments. If at least rough consensus is possible, I would like to have a final version ready for presentation by Saturday night. If it sounds to strong, or not strong enough, or you just don't like the tone, etc. please suggest changes. - Evan --------------------------------------------------------- NARALO, by consensus agreement, urges ALAC to take every measure possible to encourage rejection of the report of the 2008 ALAC review by the ICANN board and other members of the ICANN community. The ALAC Review process has been flawed from the initial choice of review consultants, which we believe may have adversely affected the independence of the review itself. Such suspicions appear to be warranted by the complete lack of consideration of the needs of At-Large in the reviewers' draft recommendations. While the report indicates we were heard, we were clearly not listened to. The logic behind the recommendation to deny At-Large voting membership on the ICANN Board is puzzling; even in its best possible interpretation the rationale emphasizes rigidity over good and responsible governance. Not only do the ALAC review recommendations fail to progress the needs of ICANN's At-Large community, they take a significant step backwards by requesting that an even larger proportion of ALAC than currently exists be composed of unaccountable, non-representative appointees of the Nominating Committee. The result is a real and visible reduction of the voice of the community for whom ALAC is supposed to speak. Indeed, most of the report's recommendations appear designed to deny the vision ICANN originally had for At-Large, to reduce the influence of At-Large within ICANN, to reduce transparency, and to obstruct community outreach. The review fails totally to address the fact that ICANN's relationship with At-Large is bi-directional. What is at issue is not only what the community must offer to ICANN, but also what ICANN _owes_ to the community of Internet users who have neither financial nor academic interest in Internet operation. For these reasons, we call upon ALAC and other members of the ICANN community to challenge the recommendations of the current ALAC review, as well as the very frames of reference upon which they were constructed. We believe that such actions are required for the betterment of ICANN's public constituency. This statement was reached by consensus of NARALO members on June 20, 2008 after efforts to solicit opinion from its organizational and individual members.

8 13

[Fwd: [governance] (REMINDER: Deadline 15 July) 3rd GigaNet AnnualSymposium - Hyderabad, 2 December 2008 - Call for Papers]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

All, An FYI. I am sure those of you that are of the social engineering types will be salivating accordingly. >:) Happy reading! Alac fellow members, Be sure to read the following excerpt: 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control We encourage papers that examine attempts to impose copyright protection on the Internet through the intermediary of Internet service providers. This theme bridges the topics of network neutrality and intellectual property, inspired by recent incidents, such as a Belgian ISPs order by a court to use deep packet inspection to catch copyright infringement in transit, and Comcast's notorious interference with BitTorrent, which also was probably stimulated in part by copyright protection concerns. Papers can explore the feasibility and state of the art of packet inspection and other relevant techniques, analyze copyright industry and ISP industry interactions from a political economy standpoint, or examine appropriate policy responses to new and powerful packet inspection techniques. 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? We encourage papers on the economic, cultural and compatibility issues raised by the migration to a new standard for Internet domain names that allows them to reflect non-Roman scripts such as Chinese or Cyrillic. Internationalized domain names (IDNs) have a double-edged effect: they widen access for non-English or ASCII readers by making domain names easier to use, but they also introduce compatibility problems among people communicating across language boundaries, as one party may not know how to read or input the address of the other party. There are also interesting questions of competition policy, as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) must decide whether to give new generic top level domains (TLDs) in IDN scripts to incumbents operating ASCII TLDs with similar meanings, or to new competitors. Issues of consumer confusion and cross-linguistic disputes can also arise. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [governance] (REMINDER: Deadline 15 July) 3rd GigaNet AnnualSymposium - Hyderabad, 2 December 2008 - Call for Papers Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:43:18 +0200 Resent-From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> Resent-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:21:50 +0100 From: Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> Reply-To: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org,Meryem Marzouki <marzouki(a)ras.eu.org> To: Meryem Marzouki <Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr> [Apologies in case of multiple reception.] Dear colleagues, dear all, Please find hereafter the Call for Papers for the 3rd GigaNet Annual Symposium, that will be held in Hyderabad, India, on 2 December 2008, the day prior to the UN Internet Governance Forum. The GigaNet Annual Symposium is an opportunity to showcase some of the best current research on Internet Governance from around the world and provides a venue for scholars to discuss and debate these crucial issues. Previous GigaNet Symposia have been held in Athens, Greece, in 2006 and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2007, in conjuction with the annual meetings of the UN IGF. The GigaNet Program Committee encourages all scholars in the field to submit proposals on their current Internet Governance related research. Deadline for submissions is 15 July 2008. Please distribute widely. The URL of the Symposium CFP is: http:// tinyurl.com/ynsuuf Best regards, Meryem Marzouki (2008 GigaNet Program Committee Chair) -- Meryem Marzouki LIP6/PolyTIC - CNRS 104 avenue du Président Kennedy - 75016 Paris http://www-polytic.lip6.fr :::::::::::::::::::::::::: Third Annual GigaNet Symposium 2 December 2008 - Hyderabad, India Hyderabad International Conference Center (HICC) Call for Papers The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector, and civil society. Each year, GigaNet organizes a one-day research symposium in conjunction with the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and in the same premises. After the first two editions in Athens, Greece (October 2006) and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (November 2007), the third GigaNet Annual Symposium will be held on December 2, 2008, in Hyderabad, India, the day before the 3rd IGF meeting. Attendance at the Symposium will be open to all and free of charge. The Symposium will be at the same location as the IGF and registration with the UN as an IGF participant may be necessary to gain entry to the building. This is a call for papers from scholars interested in presenting an original research paper at the conference. Submission topics In addition to papers on methodological aspects of Internet governance-related studies, this year's Symposium particularly encourages submissions on the following themes, which are described in more detail below: 1. Comparing Internet Governance to other Global Governance Domains 2. Networked Governance Theories and the Institutionalization of Internet Governance 3. The Role of NGOs, Social Movements and Civil Society in Internet Governance 4. Year 3 of the UN Internet Governance Forum: Assessing its Structure, Process and Impact 5. Law and Jurisdictions in Internet Governance 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? Submission requirements Applicants should submit: 1) an abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, of the proposed paper that describes the main research question(s), methods employed, and the papers relevance and value to the thematic area; and 2) a one page summary curriculum vitae listing in particular the applicants current institutional affiliation(s), advanced degrees, scholarly publications relevant to Internet governance, and web sites, if available. Submission materials should be emailed directly to the chairperson of the 2008 Program Committee, Dr. Meryem Marzouki, at Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr by no later than July 15, 2008, midnight GMT. Members of the 2008 program committee will review submissions according to the same criteria. In order to ensure fairness of the evaluation process, submissions that do not conform to the requested format will not be considered. The Program Committee will notify applicants of its decisions via email by September 15, 2008. A full paper upon which oral or poster presentation will be based must be delivered to the same address by October 10, 2008, midnight GMT in order for the author(s) to be included in the program. While GigaNet asserts no copyright to authors work, it is expected that the version of the paper presented orally or as poster will be made available for posting on the GigaNet website. Travel scholarships for a few outstanding accepted papers may be available for scholars who would otherwise be unable to attend. Applicants who are accepted will be informed of these opportunities after September 15. 2008 GigaNet Symposium Program Committee: - Ana Abreu, Labeurb/Unicamp and Paulista University, Campinas (SP), Brazil - Slavka Antonova, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand - Meryem Marzouki, LIP6/PolyTIC-CNRS Laboratory, Paris, France (Chair) - John Mathiason, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse (NY), USA - Milton Mueller, Syracuse University School of Information Studies, Syracuse (NY), USA - Max Senges, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain - Rolf H. Weber, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland Important dates: - 15 July 2008: abstract submission deadline (to be sent to: Meryem.Marzouki(a)lip6.fr) - 15 September 2008: notification to applicants - 10 October 2008: full papers due - 15 October 2008: 2008 GigaNet symposium program finalized - 2 December 2008: 2008 GigaNet symposium, HICC, Hyderabad, India Topics Description 1. Comparing Internet Governance to other Global Governance Domains The concept of global governance has flourished in a number of fields: trade, security, environment, development -- as well as Internet. However, most general analyses of global governance ignore global Internet governance. Conversely, very few Internet governance analyses are conducted through comparative frameworks. Submissions are invited to help frame Internet governance in a broader, global governance perspective. What could be learnt from experiences of global governance in other fields? Are there any general instruments and methods of global governance, irrespective of the domain area it addresses? Could some similarities or invariants of a global governance process be identified? 2. Networked Governance Theories and the Institutionalization of Internet Governance The global policy discourse on Internet governance involves more diverse actors and newly created institutions. There is a need to explore the dynamics of this changing institutionalization process through theoretical and empirical analysis. Recent work explores network forms of organization in political and governance contexts, at national and international levels, most notably with the concept of transgovernmental networks to solve sector-specific problems. We call for papers that apply, test and criticize ideas of networked governance in the context of global Internet governance. We encourage submissions that analyze collaborative policy-making in related institutions and interactions between them. We are especially interested in papers that critically analyze these forms of governance in terms of fairness and accountability and their relationship to democratic principles. Can presently excluded or minority communities enhance their participation? Beyond the expert discourse and the interplay amongst dedicated stakeholders, can networked governance represent people, rather than just established interests and agencies? What are the available tools and practices to facilitate their participation and deliberation, in terms of discourse, collaboration and decision-making? 3. Role of NGOs, Social Movements and Civil Society in Internet Governance Important but subtle transformations have occurred in the role and participation of non-governmental and non-business actors in the 6 years since the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS). WSIS witnessed a somewhat usual situation, where organized social actors participated from inside the process through structured non- governmental organizations, and social movements exercised some more radical pressure from the outside. Since the creation of the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), this mode of participation has turned into a consensus-based cooperation, where civil society actors are supposed to contribute on equal footing with governments and business actors, in most cases in their individual capacity and rather disconnected from social movements. We seek papers that analyze the evolution of involved social actors and their structuring, especially with regards to the historical evolution of the concept of civil society, and to explore in which ways and to what extent these transformations may be related to the move from government to governance. 4. Year 3 of the UN Internet Governance Forum: Assessing its Structure, Process and Impact The WSIS created and mandated the IGF to address critical, value- adding global Internet governance functions that cannot be entirely performed by any existing institution. This includes: highlighting emerging issues, assessing the embodiment of WSIS principles, and strengthening the participation of stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms. Furthermore, the IGF was defined as multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent body; it has been structured through a Secretariat, a multi-stakeholder advisory group (MAG), and a special advisory group to the MAGs chair; and for 3 years, it has been operating as an open discursive space, prepared through open consultation sessions. Submissions are invited to explore whether the IGF has fulfilled its mandate at this step, which difficulties can be identified and how they could be solved. Has the IGF structure, management and advisory mechanisms proven to be adequate and compliant with the WSIS Tunis Agenda requirements? What strengths could be reinforced and weaknesses overcome? 5. Law and Jurisdictions in Internet Governance The Internet must now be considered a major factor when elaborating regulatory principles to deal with the circulation of content and data and with the protection of the general communications infrastructure. This is not an easy task because of its implications on the respect for universal human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, where States differ widely on their implementation of these international standards, even among coherent regional entities. The task becomes even more complex due to conflicts of competences among overlapping jurisdictions. We seek papers that identify and explore conflicts among national laws and attempts to harmonize them. We also seek papers that explore the relevance to the global Internet of public and private international law currently in force or being considered in ongoing international negotiations. Submissions analyzing the role and positions of various players in these processes are also encouraged. 6. Copyright Protection, Internet Service Providers and Technical Mechanisms of Control We encourage papers that examine attempts to impose copyright protection on the Internet through the intermediary of Internet service providers. This theme bridges the topics of network neutrality and intellectual property, inspired by recent incidents, such as a Belgian ISPs order by a court to use deep packet inspection to catch copyright infringement in transit, and Comcast's notorious interference with BitTorrent, which also was probably stimulated in part by copyright protection concerns. Papers can explore the feasibility and state of the art of packet inspection and other relevant techniques, analyze copyright industry and ISP industry interactions from a political economy standpoint, or examine appropriate policy responses to new and powerful packet inspection techniques. 7. Internationalized Domain Names: Expanding Access or Tower of Babel? We encourage papers on the economic, cultural and compatibility issues raised by the migration to a new standard for Internet domain names that allows them to reflect non-Roman scripts such as Chinese or Cyrillic. Internationalized domain names (IDNs) have a double- edged effect: they widen access for non-English or ASCII readers by making domain names easier to use, but they also introduce compatibility problems among people communicating across language boundaries, as one party may not know how to read or input the address of the other party. There are also interesting questions of competition policy, as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) must decide whether to give new generic top level domains (TLDs) in IDN scripts to incumbents operating ASCII TLDs with similar meanings, or to new competitors. Issues of consumer confusion and cross-linguistic disputes can also arise. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance(a)lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe(a)lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [ga] GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

Sotiris and all, Your right as far as GoDaddy is concerned, it appears. I am sure my friends in Canada find this as unsurprising and sleazy as I do. Sadly some of them ( users and Registrants ) have been tarnished as a result, as well as a result of ICANN's poor oversight along with DOC/NTIA's poor oversight of ICANN. I as an American, appologize to my fellow Canadians for the actions of a Sr. Executive of an American company for their sleazy and disgusting business practices. I hope that our good friends in Canada and everywhere will except my own personal appology for the actions of GoDaddy Inc. Not all American business operate in this ugly, sleasy and disgusting manner. Unfortunately GoDaddy has. >:( I am also fairly sure that if you check, which I and some of our members have, that GoDaddy is also most prolific registrar of Child Porn Domain Names as well. But I am sure DHS and USDOJ as well as DOC/NTIA haven't looked into that "Element" of the GoDaddy - ICANN relationship, eh? But we can all hope that someday they will. I only hope that the do so sometime in my lifetime, but I am even very doubtful of that... >:( sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com wrote: > > http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/29/0625249 > > It's a looter's game after all, even with established and profitable > business models... > > Still waiting for you to explin howa .bank TLD will add value to the > namespace. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

GoDaddy VP Caught Bidding Against Customers
by Danny Younger June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/29/0625249

2 1

Re: [NA-Discuss] [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100, 000-plus price tag
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 29, 2008

June 29, 2008

Roberto and all, Good point and all true Roberto. What's better though is cooperation between the root structure systems. Oh I forgot, ICANN doesn't want to do that, do they. Shame that. More importantly is the collisions ( non physical ) of DN's that share the same TLD but are on different root structure systems. Who was first in Commerce will and should have precedence, logically and legally speaking. Same is true for "Passing off" under the Lanham act in the US, and by International practice in the UN. Again, "first use in commerce" will and should prevail, legally, and logically speaking on a global scale as well. This where the problem is now, has been to an extent, and unless ICANN cooperates with other Root server structures, non physical collisions will ensue. That sets up a host of legal considerations extraneous, and inclusive of the Lanham Act, including, but not limited to abusive business practices act depending on who had first use of any particular TLD or DN in a TLD name space, and Restraint of Trade statutes, both US, and other countries similar statutes, and in accordance with UN practice under WIPO. This would be the case with .bank in Danny's example earlier on this thread. Yet I still applaud ICANN's opening up the gTLD and IDN gTLD name space as it offers more use in commercial and non-commercial activity. But ICANN must learn to share, or be faced with potential and likely protracted litigation which will tarnish ICANN's image further, create confusion amongst users/consumers globally, and likely engender criminal prosecution of ICANN's own Bod and Staff on commercially based grounds under Restraint of Trade grounds. I for one would not like to see this happen. How about you? I want a happy, fair and honest ICANN, don't you Roberto? Roberto Gaetano wrote: > I am missing something here. > We have been flooded over the years with emails that have been stating how > successfule alternate roots are, on how ISPs all over the world are > increasingly pointing to a system that is able to override what is in the > "ICANN root" with a different choices, and so on. > Now, what's the problem now? If ICANN delegates some TLDs that have a > different resolution in a different root system, all what it takes for who > wants to address the latter rather than the one in the ICANN root is to > change your setting and point to the alternate system. > It's called "competition", I am being told. There's nothing wrong in having > different highways systems, as it already happens with different railroad > systems. > Cheers, > Roberto > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > [mailto:owner-ga@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com > > Sent: Sunday, 29 June 2008 01:30 > > To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > $100, 000-plus price tag > > > > > > What a load of crap Danny! Are you bucking for employment at > > ICANN again or something? > > > > Truly a sad day for the Internet indeed. > > > > Here's an analogy for you: What if your town along with your > > neighbouring towns have simply lost confidence in the > > existing Highway or Levee authorities because they have been > > siphoning off the the money that was intended for maintenance > > to say... fight pointless wars overseas or some such > > nonsense... So, the highway and levee systems around your > > town(s) are not what you and your fellow country bumpkins > > were hoping for when you paid your taxes like good little > > sheeple. So, your town and its neighbouring towns decide to > > build your own highways and levee systems ON YOUR OWN PRIVATE > > LAND. You end up running into many others in neighbouring > > towns and cities who feel the same way across the country and > > all together and at your own expense you end up setting up > > your system of highways (or levees). Then, all of a sudden, > > the looters at the now anachronistic Highway/Levee Authority > > move in and take over your highways and levees because they > > have the guns, bombs, and HAARP. How would that make you feel > > Mr. Establishment Apologist? > > > > Regards, > > > > Sotiris > > > > > > > > John, > > > > > > I don't see it that way. Let me try to use an analogy. > > There are a > > > set of properties that are in a poorly-trafficked side of > > town. Most > > > folks can't easily find these properties as they are not > > listed in the > > > maps (search engines) that most people will use. They provide some > > > local benefit to those that own the properties and to the > > limited set > > > of neighbors that are aware of the property locations, but > > as they are > > > not situated on the main thoroughfares, most will just pass them by > > > without even realizing that they are there. > > > > > > The owners of these properties can arrange to move these > > structures to > > > the main highway by entering into a leasehold arrangement with the > > > highway department (the same way that a McDonald's, for > > example, can > > > occupy a prime rest stop location along an interstate thruway). Of > > > course, these property owners may have to compete with > > other property > > > owners to obtain such a lease. > > > > > > And yes, there are times when a major highway might pass through a > > > minor property development and create a loss situation for > > a property > > > owner as the highway builders exercise their eminent domain > > rights. > > > In such cases, there are victims, and often enough such > > victims are not compensated. > > > > > > Anyone that has watched the development plans for this highway has > > > known that it has been many years in the making; certainly > > enough time > > > for property owners to make their plans. > > > > > > Most would say: you can't stop the march of progress. Most would > > > also agree that progress outweighs the needs of the few > > whose assets > > > might be damaged. Such is life. > > > > > > Those that choose not to get out of the way of a > > steamroller will wind > > > up being crushed -- that's just the way that it is. If you seek to > > > grow your properties, the consider entering into the > > process set up by > > > the highway department. You have just as much right as > > anyone else to > > > bid on a lease (and ICANN leases are forever). Put together a > > > business plan and field a bid. It's a better option than > > grousing over the current situation. > > > > > > regards, > > > Danny > > > > > > --- On Sat, 6/28/08, John Palmer > > <jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net> wrote: > > > > > >> From: John Palmer <jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net> > > >> Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 4:27 PM This is nothing but > > an attempt > > >> at wholesale theft of property from one group of people (small > > >> businesses) by an organization so that they can sell that stolen > > >> property to rich and powerful people. Most of the gTLDs that are > > >> popular are already owned and operated by companies, most of them > > >> small businesses with limited resources. You know how > > justice works > > >> in the country - You get justice if you can buy it, > > otherwise, you're > > >> out of luck. They are now proposing to do what they did with .BIZ > > >> back in 2000 on a wide scale basis. > > >> > > >> Whats new? ICANN is all about stealing things it does not own and > > >> profiting off of it. We all know, for instance, that the UDRP is > > >> nothing but a scheme that allows rich and powerful > > interests to steal > > >> domains from poor people. > > >> > > >> ICANN, Dick Cheney, George Bush, the Bilderburgs, > > Hapsburgs, Vladimir > > >> Putin, Robert Mugabe - no difference between any of them. > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Dominik Filipp" > > >> <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> > > >> To: <sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com>; > > >> <ga(a)gnso.icann.org> > > >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:59 PM > > >> Subject: RE: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Sotiris, > > >> > > >> bright conclusions as usual, but I see one positive aspect > > on it, a > > >> decrease of Verisign's .COM dominance. Just imagine perfect URL > > >> addresses such as > > >> > > >> http://microsoft > > >> http://ibm > > >> http://xerox > > >> > > >> affordable for the rich though. > > >> > > >> But all the rest in your post remains perfectly valid. > > >> > > >> Dominik > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: owner-ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> [mailto:owner-ga@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > >> sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com > > >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 5:03 PM > > >> To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org > > >> Subject: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with > > >> $100,000-plus price tag > > >> > > >> > > >> All, > > >> > > >> See article: > > >> > > http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4218 > > >> 629 > > >> .ece > > >> > > >> One last money grab by the looters at ICANN and their moocher > > >> cronies. > > >> The day of the truly international, standardized Internet is over. > > >> This move is a pretty transparent attempt to dominate any > > DNS system > > >> by a bunch of shortsighted and pigheaded individuals who > > have all the > > >> visionary capacity of a rotten potato. The real (and > > >> unstated) intent of > > >> this move is to preclude the advent of extra-ICANN DNS > > systems in any > > >> language on earth, such that the resulting (or continuing) US > > >> dominated addressing system will remain within the purview of > > >> American control. In effect, what ICANN is telling the > > world is that > > >> no country/nation has the right to create its own DNS as they will > > >> simply collide it into irrelevancy and make a handsome "profit" at > > >> the same time! > > >> > > >> A sad day for Internet users worldwide. > > >> > > >> Sotiris > > >> > > >> P.S. I will be unsubscribing from this list as there is no > > longer any > > >> reason for me to follow the meaningless blabber hereon. > > >> Good luck to all > > >> of you (except to the looters and moochers, I hope your genitalia > > >> rot). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: winmail.dat > winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef > Encoding: base64 Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [ga] ECTA Letter to Twomey
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Danny and all, Thank you for making us all aware of this VERY interesting letter to Mr. Twomey and ICANN via the ISPCP rather than in a more open and transparent manner. I remain unsurprised, as do our members that ecta and ICANN continue to be less than transparent and open with the larger internet, user, and registrant community. As such I hope that Glen will put out an announcement regarding this letter and in doing so seeks the user and registrant community sector of the private sector as to their opinion on the contents and tone of this letter accordingly. I know that a good number of our members are ECTA members, registrants, and trade mark holders and do not share the ECTA's position and concern expressed in this letter from ECTA and none that I know of, or have heard of even, knew that this letter was sent or considered at any time. This therefore leads to the belief that the ECTA members were not broadly consulted before this letter was sent, and as such cannot be considered representative of the full or majority of the ECTA members accordingly. -----Original Message----- >From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >Sent: Jun 28, 2008 9:12 AM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >Subject: [ga] ECTA Letter to Twomey > > >The European Communities Trade Mark Association has sent a letter to Paul Twomey regarding GNSO improvements. It doesn't appear in the ICANN Correspondence pages, but may be found via the ISPCP list -- see http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ispcp/msg00433.html > > > Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Community Members Request an ALAC Investigation
by Danny Younger June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Dear all, I have received a request to have the ALAC investigate an issue -- it concerns possible gaming of the .asia sunrise cycle. The preliminary details are spelled out below. Please advise the course of action that will be taken by the Committee. Thank you, Danny Younger --- On Fri, 6/27/08, Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> wrote: > From: Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz(a)mailinator.com> > Subject: Danny: Possible dot.ASIA Front-Running scheme > To: dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com > Date: Friday, June 27, 2008, 11:42 PM > Danny, > > Please run this on the ALAC mail-list. > > It looks like there is a 'Front-Running' scheme > going on with the .ASIA > Auctions > > http://www.dotasia-complot.org/ > > http://www.dotasia-complot.org/cat30.html > > The Guy (Thomas Rucker) is doing his homework, its worthy > of a ALAC probe, > that may flush out the bushes > > Thnx

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100, 000-plus price tag
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Sotiris and all, This is one time amongst a host of others that I did not, I actually agree with Vint. The Internet is a public resource or is supposed to be. But than again aren't governments part of the Public as well? My answer is yes, but only part! Yet governments do, can, and will, directly, indirectly, or by legal statute, regulate the Internet. How far this will go in certain countries is a matter of good guessing and significant political intrigue. Oh my, what drama! And of course all in the name of good for the internet and good for the users, and introduced by various social engineering crackpots of multiple politically diverse bents. How lovely! sotiris(a)hermesnetwork.com wrote: > > In the course of time we will have good new TLDs that will serve > > particular needs. I, for one, look forward to the possibilities offered > > by a .bank TLD. These TLDS will add value to the namespace, and they will > > be readily found by those using common search engine applications. And > > yes, we will still have some remaining vanity TLDs outside of the root > > that almost no one will find that will continue to offer little to the > > broader Internet community. > > That is a rosy picture indeed. Personally, I don't see the need for a > .bank TLD as the existing namespace has not hindered online banking > developments in any way, at least not in any way that I can see... Perhaps > you could explain to us all *how* a .bank TLD will add value to the > namespace, except of course to the registry/registrars who will peddle the > TLD? > > When Jon Postel stated his opposition to the expansion of the TLD > namespace, it was because he actually had a clear understanding of what he > was about. I think you need to take a look at an interesting article you > may not have run across yet entitled "Vint Cerf Wonders If We Need To > Nationalize the Internet" see: > http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/25/vint-cerf-wonders-if-we-need-to-nation… > > Surely Atlas must be shrugging these days... > > Regards, > > Sotiris Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ICANN Board Approves Censorship Policy for DomainNames Based on Morality: 2 Board Members Speak Against It]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 28, 2008

June 28, 2008

Vittorio and all, I must admit that Vittorio has a good point. The ALAC hasn't formulated any consensus that can be definitely demonstrated without objection to anything what so ever. Neither have any of the ALS'es to my knowledge. But this I believe is mostly due to the poor structure of the ALAC and the ALS'es and the lack of mechanisms that delineate what positions are, or are not, broadly shared by it's participants. Hiring a consulting group did little and may have disserved the ALAC and the ALS'es in it's weak/meager attempt to determine "Consensus". This amongst other reasons is why I believe that proposals however formal or otherwise should be voted upon by each and every participant that wishes to do so, so that there is no doubt where the members/participants actually do stand on any issue it has or may be considering. Vittorio Bertola wrote: > Evan Leibovitch ha scritto: > > Vittorio Bertola wrote: > >> 1) How comes that a statement from a constituency which is supposed to > >> represent the views of the entire world is only representing one point > >> of view, but not the other? > >> > > Because the global consensus was overwhelmingly with one side. > > > > (Why are you incapable of grasping that every region of the world might > > agree that the morality/order sections of the resolution are a bad idea?) > > Excuse me? > Can you please point me to the places where the various RALOs discussed > the issue and come to consensus to recommend against public order > considerations? > At least for Europe, I haven't seen any kind of discussion to this regard. > > > In fact, it is notable that, despite the considerable diversity within > > At-Large, it was capable of gaining consensus on this position. Perhaps > > that should indicate to you that condemnation for these clauses is > > widespread; this is absolutely not a view from just one region. > > > >> 2) How comes that the ALAC only stated the negative aspects of this > >> decision, but did not bother to mention the positive sides and the > >> satisfaction of many At Large participants? > >> > > > > Perhaps you did not take the time to listen to Wendy's actual comments; > > the very first thing she said was "the at-large, as registrants and as > > users of domain names, supports the introduction of new gTLDs". > > > > But her comments indicated that the good parts -- which we all want -- > > are seriously poisoned by the bad. Any long-term view of the situation > > must acknowledge that the short-term benefit of new gTLDs will be > > seriously impeded by the morality and order sections. > > This is your opinion. > My opinion is that the sections on morality and public order will > actually make the introduction of new gTLDs viable and stable. > I am sure that my opinion is shared by several other ALSes. > Why wasn't this opinion reflected in the ALAC statement? I'm not saying > that the ALAC must adopt my opinion, but certainly, by stating that the > At Large supports a position which is far from being consensual, it is > stating the fake. > > >> 3) How were the community and the ALSes consulted on that statement? > >> > > NCUC expressed this position emphatically yet was ignored in the GNSO > > conclusion. > > > > Of course, as is overwhelmingly the case, ALAC was put in a responsive > > position and did not have enough time to do a complete canvass of ALSs. > > So it was the ALAC -- a mainly-elected global group intended to express > > the views of the grassroots -- which did what it could, together with > > the elected RALO chairs and secretariats who were able to confirm the > > community agreements with the ALAC position. > > These recommendations have been out for one year or so, and there was no > time to ask for ALS / public comment on an ALAC position?? > I think that the ALAC should better come up with a better excuse... > Ciao, > -- > vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- > --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ICANN Board Approves Censorship Policy for DomainNames Based on Morality: 2 Board Members Speak Against It]
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

Michele and all, Well, the subjectiveness of any given string will be the decision of the GNSO council however it will be constituted after the GNSO review decision is finalized. Than the Bod will make a final decision as to if ICANN agrees to the proposal and the string associated with same. At that point, DOC/NTIA with the input of the GAC will either approve or disapprove. The test case will again be the reconsideration of .XXX., as ICANN is looking to trying to avoid being sued by the original group that put forth that proposal pending the called upon independent review, which I believe but do not know, ICANN's legal folks feel is not going to be favorable towards ICANN or DOC/NTIA and needs to buy time. As the .XXX proposal cost an estimated $4m to prepare and present, and that if ICANN looses a potential suit from the original group that put forth that proposal and damages are assessed, those damages could easily exceed 5 to 12 times the actual cost of the original .XXX proposal and each individual Bod members and GNSO council members at the time of reversing it's original decision, could be held financially responsible for all or part of any potential damage award. Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote: > > I also > >know that there are strings that spell a benign word in one language, > >and an indecent word in another, and that public morality means very > >different things in different countries. > > Exactly. It's far too subjective. > > -- > Mr Michele Neylon > Blacknight Solutions > Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection > http://www.blacknight.com/ > http://blog.blacknight.com/ > Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 > Locall: 1850 929 929 > Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 > Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 > ------------------------------- > Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty > Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0