[NA-Discuss] LACTLD Statement

[Eduardo Diaz]

So from all this discussion, I gathered that ICANN do not have anything to
say about ccTLD abuse. Is this true?

-ed

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> It is at times like this that I am reminded of the prayer attributed
> to Reinhold
> Niebuhr:
>
> "God give us grace, to accept with serenity the things that cannot be
> changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the
> wisdom
> to distinguish the one from the other."
>
> Even if you're an atheist, that quotation would appear to apply here.
>
> There are many, myself included, who believe that ICANN has engaged in
> significant feature creep from what what was supposed to be mainly a
> technical co-ordinating body. One could easily argue that the ccTLD world
> has good reason to want itself outside the bounds of at least some of
> ICANN's various power plays. It has an interest in ICANN policy related to
> registrars, but not in oversight over matters that are arguably of national
> sovereignty. I personally have zero taste in fighting governments' claim of
> ownership of their respsective ccTLDs.
>
> That some ccTLDs have been acting as generics is nothing new -- or should I
> say nothing *.nu*? That, along with .tv, .fm, .to and quite a few others,
> have been doing this for quite a while, with the blessing of those
> countries' governments. Unlike with gTLDs, their number is relatively
> stable
> -- while new ones are added from time to time thanks to geopolitical shift,
> the process for dealing with ccTLDs for no-longer-existing countries is
> confused and apparently jurisdiction-free (witness the state of* .su*).
>
> So if there are new efforts to monetize ccTLDs by selling them to
> non-nationals (*.me* appears merely the latest attempt), our efforts within
> ICANN to affect this are minimal if they are done with government approval.
> Certainly ICANN has no political or moral authority to go against the
> express wish of a government for assignment of its TLD operator, so long as
> they have the technical issues right. (I would not consider location of the
> registry outside of the ccTLD country, on its own, to constitute abuse.)
>
> Now... Garth came in to NARALO as a fighter of domain abuse, and it is
> reasonable that we want to investigate domain abuse in ccTLDs just as
> within
> the generics. (Certainly most of the general public is not aware of the
> distinctions beyond the obvious ones of identity, and arguably much of the
> abuse within ccTLDs happens at the registrant and registrar level.) If we
> cannot directly influence policy on ccTLDs through ICANN, we can certainly
> produce educational and other materials that would help indicate to
> potential registrants how various ccTLD policies affect them. And if some
> ccTLDs either encourage or tolerate bad actors more than others, we may
> have
> a role to play here.
>
> It is surprising to me how many new voices are heard from on this issue,
> voices that have said barely anything else on other NARALO issues that are
> arguably more important. Having said that, perhaps there is something
> constructive that may come of this. Would the people involved in this
> discussion be interested in producing some kind of research on ccTLD
> abuse?It is clear that At-Large's mandate covers all aspects of ICANN
> operation,
> which differentiates us from, say, NCUC's role in GNSO. So if we have
> something to say about something that ICANN should do, or that ICANN should
> not do in this regard, let's do it. If not, let's move on to the things in
> which we *do* have a role to play.
>
> - Evan
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at 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
> ------
>



-- 
NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only
for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
you have received this communication by error, please notify us immediately
by e-mail, and delete the original message.