[At-Large] Definition of registration abuse

[Karl Auerbach]

John R. Levine wrote:
>> As long as it takes.  Otherwise we will have a system in which a mere 
>> accusation is sufficient.
> 
> Do you really think it is a good idea to require a court case and a 
> trial to take down a phish site pretending to be Paypal or the Bank of 
> America?

How does one know that a particular web site is "a phish site pretending 
to be Paypal or the Bank of America"?  Perhaps it is operating under a 
license?  Perhaps it is a permissible parody.

We ought not to allow the takedown of things simply on accusation. 
There needs to be some process in which a impartial person takes a look 
at the facts and hears arguments.  This need not be a heavyweight process.

Once the door is open for takedown by accusation then we've just handed 
every disgruntled person or over exuberant politico a means of causing 
trouble.

This is hardly a fantasy.  We can look at the unjustified DMCA takedown 
claims and the heavyhanded Cease and Desist letters that have become 
routine tools by those who have highly inflated notions about the extent 
of their trademark and copyright rights.

Our history is full of periods in which simple accusation was translated 
into suppression - For instance in the early 1950's Senator Macarthy and 
his ilk ruined many innocent people by nothing more than unsubstantiated 
accusation.

The last election indicated that Youtube clips are going to be a big 
element of future campaigns.  We can imagine that in the next election 
that opponents of a video will start to generate takedown notices on the 
most flimsily of grounds - perhaps on the basis of a trademarked name on 
a sign in the background or a bit of music that is drifted in during an 
interview.  I suspect that it will get very nasty.

That's the kind of world we are going to end up with if we allow 
vigilante decisions to restrict the use of the internet.

		--karl--