[LAC-Discuss] FW: -- ICANN New gTLD Policy Up for Debate in Lisbon: Censorship and National Sovereignty at Issue
Carlton A Samuels
carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm
Wed Mar 28 18:52:25 EDT 2007
Dear Christian:
Many thanks for your support and suggestion. Given the timeline for our
voices to be heard, the Secretariat recommends that if given an opportunity
to make a formal presentation, our representatives on ALAC be instructed in
respect of Recommendation Number 6 of the Draft Final Report on Introduction
of New Generic Top-Level Domains to do the following:
1) Associate with the sentiments expressed in the paper by Michael Palage
and Avri Doria
2) Associate with NCUC’s proposal for change in respect of Terms of
Reference 2 (v)
3) To express our strong support for ICANN to remain content-neutral in
the allocation of new top-level domains
My recommendation #2 is suggested in an abundance of caution and with full
recognition that some national governments are still inclined to censorship.
This, in my view, is just as odious. But at least it should not be done with
the support and consent of ICANN.
I would further advise and recommend that individual ALS representatives
execute draft letters to ICANN Board and the GAC exhibited respectively at
http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_board_gtld and
http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_gac_gtlds for onward transmission.
Kind regards,
Carlton
[Spanish Version]
Estimado Christian:
Muchas gracias por su apoyo y la sugerencia. Dado el calendario para
nuestras voces para ser oído, la Secretaría recomienda que si dada una
oportunidad de hacer una presentación formal, nuestros representantes en
ALAC son instruidos en el respeto del Número de la Recomendación 6 del Draft
Final Report on Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains para hacer lo
siguiente:
1) El Socio con los sentimientos expresados en el papel por Michael Palage y
Avri Doria
2) El Socio con la propuesta de NCUC para el cambio en el respeto de
Términos de la Referencia 2 (V)
3) Expresar nuestro apoyo fuerte para ICANN para quedarse contento-neutral
en la asignación de nuevos dominios primero-planos
Mi recomendación #2 es sugerido en una abundancia del cuidado y con el
reconocimiento repleto que algunos gobiernos nacionales son inclinados
todavía a la censura. Esto, en mi opinión, es así como odioso. Pero por lo
menos no debe ser hecho con el apoyo y el consentimiento de ICANN.
Aconsejaría aún más y recomendaría que representantes individuales de AL
ejecuten cartas de giro a la Tabla de ICANN y el GAC exhibió respectivamente
en http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_board_gtld y
http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_gac_gtlds para adelante
transmisión.
Saludos,
Carlton
_____
From: lac-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:lac-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of
jam at jacquelinemorris.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:32 PM
To: Christian Hess Araya
Cc: lac-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [LAC-Discuss] [LAC-ALS] FW: -- ICANN New gTLD Policy Up for
Debate in Lisbon: Censorship and National Sovereignty at Issue -
The ICANN Board will vote on it on Friday morning GMT.
The report is from the other Civil Society group in ICANN, the NCUC.
Jacqueline
Google translation:
El tablero de ICANN votará sobre él en el GMT de la mañana de viernes. El
informe es del otro grupo civil en ICANN, el NCUC.
Jacqueline
Quoting Christian Hess Araya <chess at Poder-Judicial.go.cr>:
> ENGLISH: Wow, Carlton! At first, I was confused by the strong
> wording of your message, but after reading Jacqueline's post I must
> emphatically concur in that this has to be right up there among the
> worst policy proposals in ICANN history! I would like to suggest
> that you, as the LACRALO's Secretariat, draft and then distribute a
> declaration in which we strongly condemn the proposal and call for
> its repeal.
>
> ESPAÑOL: ¡Vaya, Carlton! Inicialmente me sentí confundido por el fuerte
lenguaje de tu mensaje, pero después de leer el de Jacqueline, debo
coincidir enfáticamente en que ésta debe ser una de las peores propuestas de
política de la historia de ICANN. Me gustaría sugerir que, como Secretario
de la LACRALO, prepares y distribuyas un borrador de declaración en la que
rechacemos enérgicamente la propuesta y pidamos su desestimatoria.
>
>
> Msr. Christian Hess Araya
> Oficina: Tel. (506) 295-4721 * Fax (506) 295-3712 * Web:
> www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional/
> Personal: Apdo. postal 239-1002 * Skype: chess-cr * Web:
> www.hess-cr.com <http://www.hess-cr.com/>
> San José, Costa Rica
>
>
>
> _____
>
> De: lac-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:lac-als-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de
> Carlton A Samuels
> Enviado el: miércoles 28 de marzo del 2007 08:03
> Para: lac-als at atlarge-lists.icann.org; 'LAC Discuss'
> Asunto: [LAC-ALS] FW: -- ICANN New gTLD Policy Up for Debate in
> Lisbon:Censorship andNational Sovereignty at Issue -
>
>
>
> Dear Friends:
>
> I have forwarded the thread provided by our new ALAC Chair,
> Jacqueline Morris for your advice and hopefully, discussion towards
> a consensus from LACRALO on the several issues. Very early in its
> tenure, the Secretariat took the decision that it would seek to
> report consensus rather than drive it. However in the matter here
> below, conscience trumps duty.
>
>
>
> I wish to associate myself in the strongest possible terms with the
> position that advises ICANN to remain neutral on content issues, if
> only because of my own personal loathing for anyone other than me
> deciding what I may think, read or consume in the pursuit of
> knowledge. Furthermore, I abhor all and every attempt at censorship
> in whatever form. And finally, I consider the attempt to impose
> extra-national or supranational oversight in this venture as cynical
> and is rightly condemned as a form of neo-imperialism.
>
>
>
> Carlton
>
>
>
> [Spanish Version]
>
>
>
> Amigos Todos:
>
> He adelantado el hilo proporcionado por nuestra nueva Chair de ALAC,
Jacqueline Morris para su consejo y optimistamente, la discusión hacia un
consenso de LACRALO en los varios asuntos. Muy temprano en su ocupación, la
Secretaría tomó la decisión que lo procuraría informar el consenso antes que
lo maneja. Sin embargo en el asunto aquí abajo, la conciencia triunfa el
deber.
>
>
>
> Deseo asociarme en los términos posibles más fuertes con la posición que
aconseja ICANN para quedarse neutral en asuntos contentos, si solamente a
causa de mi propio aborrecer personal para cualquiera otro que yo decidiendo
lo que puedo pensar, poder leer o puedo consumir en el persecución del
conocimiento. Además, aborrezco todo y cada tentativa en la censura en
cualquier forma. Y finalmente, considero la tentativa para imponer el
descuido extra-nacional o supranacional en esta aventura como cínico y es
condenado correctamente como una forma del neo-imperialismo.
>
>
>
> Carlton
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
> The link to the latest draft of the GNSO Committee's report is here:
> http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/pdp-dec05-draft-fr.htm
>
> The link to the NCUC proposal is here:
> http://www.ipjustice.org/ICANN/drafts/022207.html
> <http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/icann_gtld_policy_problems/>
>
> ======
>
> -- ICANN New gTLD Policy Up for Debate in Lisbon: Censorship and
> National Sovereignty at Issue --
>
> 22 March 2007 - As ICANN's Board Meeting
> http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/ in Lisbon
> is about to kick-off, a number of important policy issues are on the
agenda.
>
> One of the most hotly contested issues at ICANN is the current draft
> proposal regarding
> the introduction of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) and its
> impact on free
> expression and national sovereignty.
>
> While the latest (16 March 2007) draft proposal would no longer allow a
> single country to block a new gTLD string application for
> non-technical reasons, it
> would allow any group of nations to block an application for a new
> top-level domain for
> non-technical reasons.
>
> Recommendation 6 in the draft proposal still reads "Strings must not
> be contrary to
> generally accepted legal norms relating to morality and public order."
>
> But now, instead of any 1 country being able to block a string on a
> subject it didn't
> like, any group of countries objecting to a string would be able to
> kill the application.
>
> Why would the ICANN Board want to give this kind of control and
> censorious powers to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC)?
> ICANN should stick to its technical mission and remain
> content-neutral in the allocation of new top-level domains and leave
> the politics out of the formulations.
>
> And the proposed gTLD policy still operates under the fiction that
> there are such
> accepted public policy and morality legal norms.
>
> The proposed gTLD policy is still a recipe for censorship and an
> attack on national
> sovereignty. Why should the restrictions in any one country be
> imposed upon the citizens
> of another country? No one has even attempted to provide a
> justification for that.
>
> ICANN's Non-Commercial User's Constituency (NCUC) proposed
> http://www.ipjustice.org/ICANN/drafts/022207.html to reform the new
> gTLD policy so that national laws will govern what speech may be
> permitted in a country, not ICANN policy.
> But that proposal was summarily swept aside.
>
> Former ICANN Board Member Michael Palage and current GNSO Council
> Member Avri Doria have published a paper
> http://ipjustice.org/ICANN/keep_core_neutral.pdf
> recommending that ICANN remain content-neutral and resist the path
> of censorship in the
> introduction of new gTLDs.
>
> Concerned Netizens are encouraged to contact the ICANN Board and
> their GAC Members to urge reform of the proposed policy. NCUC
> prepared a sample letter to ICANN Board Members
> http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_board_gtld and a sample
> letter to GAC Members
> http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/03/22/letter_gac_gtlds to assist
> Netizens in making their voices heard.
>
> The GNSO Committee's proposal still erroneously equates trademark
> rights with rights to
> domain names. The draft proposal attempts to justify censorship in
> the new gTLD space on
> the flaky rationale that trademark law does not permit the
> registration of scandalous
> words. The Committee fails to recognize that a trademark is an
> exclusive right to
> prevent others from using a word in commerce, and the policy they
> are setting is whether
> anyone can use use a word at all in the new gTLD space. Big difference.
>
> Both the GNSO Committee on New gTLDs and the GAC will make policy
> recommendations on the issue to the ICANN Board. The ICANN Board
> will then vote on the policy recommendations.
> The ICANN Board would be smart to remain content-neutral and not
> allow ICANN's technical mission to become muddled down in politics
> by giving GAC any power to prevent a new string for non-technical
> reasons. Nor should ICANN give itself any right to prevent a string
> for non-technical reasons. Besides the fact that its censorship, it
> will also
> create legal liability for ICANN.
>
> But the question remains open: Can ICANN stand-up to the GAC and
> resist the urge to
> impose a policy of censorship in the new gTLD space?
>
> See related: NCUC Press Release of 2/27/7 "Power Grab: ICANN to
> Become Internet's Word
> Police" http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/02/27/icann-power-grab/
>
> The ICANN GAC representatives are listed here:
> http://gac.icann.org/web/contact/reps/index.shtml
>
> The ICANN Board of Directors are listed here:
> http://www.icann.org/general/board.html
> --
> Jacqueline A. Morris
> www.jacquelinemorris.com
>
>
--
Jacqueline A. Morris
www.jacquelinemorris.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070328/8f179143/attachment.html>
More information about the lac-discuss-en
mailing list