[EURO-Discuss] draft ALAC statement on ICM/xxx

Patrick Vande Walle patrick at vande-walle.eu
Fri Apr 23 06:54:35 CDT 2010


On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 12:50:47 +0200, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
<ocl at gih.com>
wrote:
> I am in two minds about this, because I prefer Patrick's statement than
> NARALO's statement.
> 

Olivier, 

You got me thinking again. 

I am alright with the first part of the NARALO statement. However, the
sentence which invokes "free speech" is disturbing me. 

I am convinced that, in some societies, people honestly expect their
government should protect them from what they consider inappropriate
content. As an example, most European countries ban Nazi content, for
obvious historical reasons. Yet, we do not consider that as censorship, but
rather as a societal consensus. 

What bothers me is that some countries oppose the adoption of a a *global*
resource like triple X to suit their *local* culture. The are basically
trying to impose their values on the rest of the world. Nothing would
prevent these countries which oppose a domain to pass legislation
prohibiting triple X on their territory. I do not like or support that, but
it least it would be their choice.

So, at second thought, I do not support the NARALO statement. The free
speech argument is not convincing and often seen as Northern Hemisphere
imperialism. we should rather stick to the legal reasoning. There has been
a decision by a panel which both parties agreed to comply to beforehand.
Now ICANN has no other option than to comply to the decision. 


> I realise the huge risks that ICANN might be
> subjected to if it got sued. What upsets me more about the subject is
> that ICANN would be at risk. That's a systemic issue, an Achilles' heel
> which I find untenable and which I hope we can address in the long term.

whatever the decision, ICANN  will get sued anyway :-(

Patrick




More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list