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

Re: [NA-Discuss] [ga] Potential Danger Ahead for Registrants -- dot-info Abusive Domain Use Policy
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 22, 2008

June 22, 2008

George and all, Glad you swung in George ( of the jungle )! Must be a banana shortage amongst other food shortages in your neck of the jungle. >:) But more to the point, yes this is rather troubling indeed. And yes of course, registries like Verisign I am sure are watching very closely to see how ICANN responds and indeed may respond in kind. This request seems like a "Post-front-running" scheme to me... The real danger is that if approved, and/or practiced by afilias or other registries for political purposes to suppress speech, I am rather sure that the courts will need to be involved at some point to correct abusive registry practices such as this one could become or used for. However there is always an upside to this requests approach to dealing with abusive Domains, such as those the promote Child pornography, spam, and those that are frequently used for phishing purposes. Such a practice would relieve the ICANN staff from doing their oversight in this narrow but very important regard and at the same time send a message to other yet to be reveled or known abusive domain name registrants that they need to clean up their act, or face Registry damnation. But than again I thought that DMCA and LEA's and the courts is/are for addressing these abusive Domain name problems? If now these entities are not adequate as ACTA indicates, and perhaps the courts dockets are too inundated with filings as well as US-CERT.gov and IC3.GOV filed complaints are too numerous to address in a timely manner, than perhaps this request will act as a potential relief valve? -----Original Message----- >From: George Kirikos <gkirikos(a)yahoo.com> >Sent: Jun 21, 2008 3:50 PM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >Subject: [ga] Potential Danger Ahead for Registrants -- dot-info Abusive Domain Use Policy > > >Hi folks, > >ICANN has posted a request by Afilias for a new registry service in >relation to "abusive" domains in dot-info: > >http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/index.html#2008007 >http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/afilias-request-20jun08.pdf > >While in general the proposal is motivated by good intentions, the >devil is in the details. While most folks (including myself) probably >care very little about the .info TLD, my concern is that any bad >implementation in .info might be copied or used as a precedent in other >more important TLDs, in particular .com run by VeriSign. > >In particular: > > >"Pursuant to Section 3.6.5 of the RRA, Afilias reserves the right to >deny, **cancel** or transfer any registration or transaction, or place >any domain name(s) on registry lock, hold or similar status, that it >deems necessary, **in its discretion**;........" > >(emphasis added) > >I would be against giving VeriSign (if the model was copied to .com) >that discretionary power over my company's domains, especially the >"right to cancel." What exactly is "illegal"? In China, I'm sure there >are many things that are illegal that are perfectly legal in Canada, >the USA or the EU. Suppose a domain name gets hacked for a brief time, >and is temporarily used to serve up spam or malware, etc. That company >experiencing bad luck, having their site hacked, can then be put >totally out of business in the event that the registry operator, "in >its discretion," decides to cancel the domain name. > >Thus, I think concern should be raised that any implementation be very >conservative in order to protect the inherent right of registrants to >due process. The potential for harm in a bad implementation is >enormous, and companies and individuals could be put out of business if >a valuable domain name is taken from a registrant. > >Sincerely, > >George Kirikos >http://www.kirikos.com/ 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] ALAC Review Draft is published
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 20, 2008

June 20, 2008

Bret and all, I and I am very sure most users and registrants are more interested in what is "Best for ICANN" than what is simply "Good for ICANN" given that ICANN is a service Corporation 501 c(3) California corporation with a defined and distinct duty to the community it serves which are the users and registrant-users. Registries and Registrars are a part of the service ICANN is required to provide accordingly. Further it is the users that ultimately PAY for the service ICANN is supposed to and required to provide. So frankly yet again, I don't believe that ICANN is even adaquately providing the service it is required to provide despite the good to execellent advise it has long now been provided to do so. -----Original Message----- >From: Bret Fausett <bfausett(a)internet.law.pro> >Sent: Jun 20, 2008 8:48 AM >To: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >On Jun 20, 2008, at 7:54 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote: >> The NomComm, like the people it selects, are accountable to nothing >> but >> an abstract notion of what is "good for ICANN". > >This is, in fact, the very guide that everyone uses when assuming an >official role within an organization, profit or non-profit. Officers >and Directors have a fiduciary obligation to act in the best interests >of the corporation. > >I suppose I'm having difficulty understanding what different >accountability mechanism you are recommending, because from my >perspective, everyone in an official ICANN position, from your >position as NARALO Chair all the way to the CEO and Chairman of the >Board, has an obligation to act for the "good of ICANN." That >obligation necessarily trumps any other obligation to any other body, >including one's employer, constituency, or ALS. > >That said, we can, and should in a healthy ICANN, have differing views >about what is "good for ICANN." > > Bret > > > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.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] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 20, 2008

June 20, 2008

Bret and all, Now you got it! Execellent approach! I do believe Robert attempted to do this very thing with his "Core Values" thread recently, but was chastized and rebuffed regarding the "Privacy" consideration. So this may also be a contentious approach as well, but in my view a far better approach none the less. Along this line one might want to review: Appeals Court Grants 4th Amendment Protection to Electronic Messages http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2008-06-19-privacy-work-commun… http://www.latimes.com/business/la-me-text19-2008jun19,0,933444.story And: Software Engineer First to be Sentenced Under Economic Espionage Act http://www.cybercrime.gov/mengSent.pdf http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BARD11B9U7.DTL And: US Congress to Consider Eavesdropping Law http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/19/congress.wiretaps/index.html http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/FISAINTRO_001_xml.pdf ] And: NebuAd Comes Under Fire for Allegedly Violating User Privacy and Security http://www.heise-online.co.uk/security/Report-slams-US-advert-server-for-wi… http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&art… http://www.freepress.net/files/NebuAd_Report.pdf -----Original Message----- >From: Bret Fausett <bfausett(a)internet.law.pro> >Sent: Jun 20, 2008 10:40 AM >To: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review > >I might try a different approach. Rather than tearing down the >Westlake report, why don't we list those principals we believe most >important for the ALAC going forward? Remember, this is a review of >the ALAC, not a review of the Westlake report, so we should talk about >how we want the ALAC to evolve. What do we want for staff support, >funding, representation on the Board and SOs? > > Bret > > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.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] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 20, 2008

June 20, 2008

Robert and all, Frankly it seems clear that the ALAC review was intended to devide users from different regions. The politics and games are a result of long standing lack of professional leadership of the ICANN staff and Bod. That reality can change, but without users and registrants driving for that change consistantly such a change will never fully be realized. -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Guerra <lists(a)privaterra.info> >Sent: Jun 20, 2008 3:14 PM >To: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review > >Evan: > >a couple of quick comments : > >- I would focus comments just on the report, and be softer on the >language related to the selection of the consultant. >- agree with evan's comments - though there is a larger - political >issue worth considering. that being that a negative response by >At-large to the review could endanger the summit being ok'd >- a politically saavy person would not ouright reject the summit >proposal - but, instead place poisoned recommendations in the alac >review. the ensuing reaction to the report, might be grounds for staff >and board to rethink support for the summit at this time. After all - >our input - politics and games - should be expected. That is the >political reality that is ICANN. the at-large community needs to >think strategically and have a - strong voice to react to the draft. >otherwise, it could be used to divide us. > >- Should we have strong reaction to the report (and i'm supportive of >that), it would be preferable if we could get other at-large regions >to support us. That way, it wouldn't be jsut NA - but broader. > >- specifics : we should also include specific changes, that we'd like to see. > >that's all for now. let's continue this discussion face to face - and >virtually - as much of NA ralo can't make to paris. > >Robert > > >On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> >> >> ------ >> NA-Discuss mailing list >> NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… >> >> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >> ------ >> > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.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

ALAC Review Draft is published
by Evan Leibovitch June 20, 2008

June 20, 2008

Well, folks, here it is. Summary of recommendations: http://icann.org/reviews/alac/alac-draft-summary-recommendations-13jun08.pdf Full report: http://icann.org/reviews/alac/alac-independent-review-final-draft-13jun08.p… Highlights: * Create two new ALAC positions, appointed by the Nominating Committee, both from Asia, to reflect that region's increased proportion of global Internet users * No other structural changes to ALAC composition * Give the existing structure a chance to work, but review the effectiveness of the RALO/ALS structure at the next ALAC review * Status quo regarding Board representation -- liaison with no vote * ALAC should establish an annual Statement of Intent as well as Strategic and Operational Plans * Increase in dedicated staff to one person per region * Increase the public comment period to allow ALAC more time to adequately respond to issues * More effective use of web-based tools to increase user participation; specifically, preference of wikis over mailing lists * Staff control over said web-based tools * Regular ALS compliance reviews There will be a workshop on the ALAC review held in the Paris meeting, and four people (Robert, Beau, Darlene and myself) will be representing NARALO there. While Wendy and Alan are not specifically there to represent us, they can still help advance our region's view. Comments -- especially specific "deal-breaking" issues -- are not only welcomed, they're _needed_ for us to play our role in shaping the future of ALAC. I urge you to read the report -- at very least the summary -- and at least understand the rationale for their recommendations before you state your case against them. :-) Please... even if you do not contribute regularly here, this is one of those pivotal times when we really do need to hear from everyone. Love it, hate it, mixed or neutral, we need your feedback this week! - Evan

9 33

Improvement of the Win-Win relationship between the Staff and A-Large
by Thompson, Darlene June 19, 2008

June 19, 2008

Hi guys, See a portion of Frederic's message below. We really need to get this into ICANN ASAP. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca <mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca> ________________________________ From: Frederic Teboul [mailto:frederic.teboul@icann.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 11:07 PM To: Evan Leibovitch Cc: Thompson, Darlene Subject: Re: Secretariat Meeting: 24th of June Moreover and for your information, 5 out of 17 ALSes from NARALO have answered to our questionnaire entitled "Improvement of the win-win relationship between the Staff and the At-Large Community". Therefore, I would highly appreciate if you could please send a "strong" reminder to our ALSes community in order to answer to these questions as soon as possible, so we can take the information we receive, put it together, and then design a longer-term plan for At-Large. In this respect, please find attached the English version of our "call". Many thanks for your understanding and your responses, Frederic Frederic E. Teboul, Ph.D., MBA Manager for At-Large Regional Affairs Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone Number: +33 6 3487 0575 (France) & +1 310 578 8642 (USA) Email: frederic.teboul(a)icann.org AIM/iSight: frederic.teboul(a)mac.com Jabber: frederic.teboul(a)jabber.icann.org Skype: frederic.teboul On 17/06/08 18:34, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan(a)telly.org> wrote: Frederic Teboul wrote: > Hello Evan and I trust all is well with you. Hi there! > I am currently reviewing the meeting notes as well as action items of > previous secretariat meeting in order to prepare our next week's > meeting (24th of June): > https://st.icann.org/secretariat/index.cgi?24_june_2008. > > Please do not hesitate to provide me any feedbacks, advices and/or > requests concerning this meeting. Certainly on the agenda, as far as I am concerned, is RALO response the ALAC review. I cannot believe how damaging that report is to the public interest. - Evan

1 0

FW: Regional Advice for ISOC NY
by Thompson, Darlene June 19, 2008

June 19, 2008

Hi all, The due diligence report on ISOC NY has been completed and is attached hereto. Now we need to get regional advice whether to approve this application or reject it. Please send your comments to me directly. They will be kept in confidence and any views expressed will be sent in by myself, keeping the sources confidential if such is desired. Thank you, D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson(a)gov.nu.ca <mailto:dthompson@gov.nu.ca> ________________________________ From: At-Large Staff [mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:54 AM To: Evan Leibovitch; Thompson, Darlene Cc: At-Large Staff Subject: Regional Advice for ISOC NY Dear Evan, Dear Darlene, Please find attached the application and the Due Diligence form for ISOC NY. We kindly ask you to provide us with the regional advice for this application in your capacity as the regional Secretariat. According to our timeline for ALS applications we should receive the regional advice by July 7th. Please note that the regional advice should capture all the views held within your region. It does not necessarily have to reflect the opinion of the Secretariat. However, if the Secretariat does not receive input from your region and happens to know the applicant, you are of course invited to share your thoughts on the application. Thank you for your assistance. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

3 2

Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Review / Comment Periods
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 19, 2008

June 19, 2008

JFC and all, It is clear to me, and most of our members that ICANN still does not yet understand or doesn not wish to understand that an @large comprised of users of many sorts is. It is becomming clear that the same is true of the ALAC and seemingly several of the RALO's. What is becoming clear is that the ALAC and the RALO's are willing to do the ICANN staff and Bod's bidding even if that means limiting to a great degree active participation of users from whatever nationality they are from. JFC Morfin wrote: > At 10:56 19/06/2008, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > >I thought I would make a point here which might be helpful with > >respect to the timing of making statements about the draft ALAC Review report. > > > >The consultation going on now is so that the draft may be publicly > >discussed in Paris, for those who feel that something is missing (as > >in you said something to the review which you believe has been left > >out), and this text hasn't been reviewed by the Board, the ALAC > >Review Committee, or anyone else. > > > >This is not to say that comments aren't welcome - on the contrary, > >as you know I'm always asking for the community to comment more, not > >less :). I just want to make sure everyone understands that the > >report will have a full comment period after it is finalised. This > >is the first of two comment periods on the report and I'm sure any > >next steps after the report will similarly be posted for public > >comment too, just as you have seen with the GNSO Review. > > Dear Nick, > the document(s) we got are big documents which are not proposed in an > easy to work on way (not a mail, not a wiki). The first thing I used > to do with that kind of document is to port them to a workable format > (which usually means to go line by line from a PDF ASCII copy to a > Open Office text, then to a wiki format if I want to work on it with > other france@large experts or members, as we did for the IDN report I > gave the URL yesterday). > > We are half the way through with many other important things to do, > due to the revamp of our strategy after our non-accreditation and our > recent press-release with a fundamental france@large meeting on July > 2nd. We are extremely attentive to this document we have not yet > started discussing since we will discuss the ATLAX project on July > 2nd, and want to understand how it will stand in comparison to ALAC. > > >I've also made a request that this comment period be lengthened, as > >translations will not be ready until only a few days before the > >present comment period is meant to end, and without translations > >many in AFRALO and LACRALO will be unable to respond on an equal > >basis to everyone else. > > This is a key issue. Comment period should start when all the > material to be considered is available. I do not understand why you > do not mention EURALO, APRALO, NARALO in your comment. When only > considering the French Language, it is an administrative language in > these RALO. > > >If you feel that the comment period is too short - do comment in > >that vein to the comment address and let Westlake know in Paris (for > >those of you who are going to be in Paris). > > We certainly will individually as france@large had adopted that > position. I take the opportunity to underline that we have not > received your answer in French to our accreditation. This language > problem is a way to for ICANN to measure the difficulty of what we > call multilinguistics (the practical support of the linguistic > diversity) they obviously have not fully understood as the IDNC > propositions show it. > > >Of course, the point made that any NARALO perspectives which are > >made clear can only help NARALO members attending Paris is IMHO > >entirely relevant, FWIW. > >I hope these comments are helpful - that's certainly the intent. > > Nick, we take your comment as helpful. We have not even fully read > the main document and just perused the first one. What strikes me is > that it does not interest me. I mean by this that it considers the > interest of ALAC for ICANN, but not for @larges. Most of the ALAC > problem is that participants are "ICANN professionnals". I did not > even found a definition of what is an "@large" and an anlysis of its > different types and motivations. But I may be wrong as, frankly we > had no time to read the document. > > I just regret that ICANN must pay external consultant to explain it > about the @large they throw away seven years ago, and they seem to > want to enregiment into a strategic plan. > > jfc > > _______________________________________________ > 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

Fw: Re: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

All, FYI thanks to Danny. Read and weap or rejoice, depending on your particular bent. -----Forwarded Message----- >From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com> >Sent: Jun 17, 2008 4:28 PM >To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org, denise.michel(a)icann.org, ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov, stacy.burnette(a)icann.org >Cc: aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov, jeffrey(a)icann.org, twomey(a)icann.org, robert(a)privaterra.org, vb(a)bertola.eu >Subject: Re: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review > >Danny and all, > > Well, well, well... My how the worm turns, eh? > > I for one am not surprised at this perfictly reasonable >filing and the reasons given by ICM, even though I personally >am against their original patition for .XXX. As to competition >in this "Space", no pun intended, I believe that there is >"Plenty" of competition, if you'll pardong the pun, all be >it that in this Market segment that competition is not >as substancial ( Exceptions .org, .com, .info, .ws, .it, >.tk, and the always popular .sl, for somwhat obvious >reasons )at the TLD level, so to speek. > > I am also sure that the Domain Name speculators were >and remain disappointed that .XXX was shot down for >moral reasons, contrary to ICANN's stated reasons >as Danny's provided links falsely indicate. The >permiations for domain names in the proposed .XXX >have rather interesting cultural and denoted meanings >as it were that might have some significant value to >future interested parties. > > However making money in the explotation of persons >of dubious behaviors is not reasonably exceptable, >and should not be. Yet ICANN's reason for rejecting >the patition should have been a completely honest one >from the onstart, which is telling in how ICANN determins >what is and what is not acceptable for a TLD of sTLD in >this case. > > So either ICANN abides by it's own bylaws and policies >or it doesn't. Can we say, "Hoist on it's own patard" >again? > >-----Original Message----- >>From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>Sent: Jun 17, 2008 10:11 AM >>To: ga(a)gnso.icann.org >>Subject: [ga] .xxx Registry Files for Independent Review >> >> >>http://www.icmregistry.com/IRP/Request.pdf >>http://www.icmregistry.com/press.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

Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 17, 2008

June 17, 2008

Dominik and all, There has been an effort all be it weak, simply and mostly because the NARALO and the ALAC is seeking funding FROM ICANN. As such being too assertive would not be in the best interests of those in the NARALO or the ALAC that either don't know how to use the internet to generate their own funding, or are too lazy to do so using sweat equity in order to get that ball rolling, as it were... Ergo, the RALO's and the ALAC will either be captured and thereby controled by funding of the hand that feed's it, or never be very effective, if effective at all. Reality has a way of being humbeling. P.S., frankly I cant see how ICANN can fund the RALO's or the ALAC as a 501(c3) corp. anyway. So the NARALO and the ALAC's leadership would be well advised to either demonstrate some REAL leadership or resign and ask the members for someone to step up and provide responsible, REAL leadership. Thankfully, never has, nor does INEGroup suffer from a weak keadership and/or a deficit in behavior that allows for such deficiencies. -----Original Message----- >From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Sent: Jun 17, 2008 2:09 AM >To: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org>, Bret Fausett <bfausett(a)internet.law.pro> >Cc: NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >Or, in other words, the NARALO effort was not worthy of any single ALAC >vote in favour of it. From the outside view it seems as though as any >such effort never existed. > >Sad but reality. > >Dominik > > >-----Original Message----- >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Dominik >Filipp >Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 10:16 AM >To: Evan Leibovitch; Bret Fausett >Cc: NA Discuss >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > > >-----Original Message----- >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan >Leibovitch >Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 12:36 AM >To: Bret Fausett >Cc: NA Discuss >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review Draft is published > >> There are voices here who say ALAC was too compromising on tasting >> even _with_ the pressure from NARALO to get rid of the AGP. >> Imagine what the position would have been had the voice of NARALO been > >> further diminished. >> >> - Evan > >I am afraid, the position would be almost the same. The final tasting >proposal was almost completely taken from Jeff Neumans's .BIZ registry >vision just decorated with some cosmetics. The ALAC in fact seconded it >unanimously and did not append any remarkable input. Despite all the >valuable effort coming from the NARALO community. > >Dominik > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists >.icann.org > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists >.icann.org > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org >------ > > >------ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ic… > >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.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

2 1