[At-Large] Guidance for Domain Name Orders

Lutz Donnerhacke lutz at iks-jena.de
Tue Mar 13 11:40:31 UTC 2012

Hi Dave,

I'm shocked about you paper: http://tinyurl.com/icann-supports-censorship
What the hell is the reason behind drafting such a collection of (at least)
misleading forms?

Your wording in the preface is completely irrelevant: It will be ignored.
The only thing pushed into the brains of law enforcement and politics is the
simple message: "ICANN is willing to support all your needs. Fill those
forms. No further questions asked."

For technical people the paper might be not directly wrong, but it is a
political nightmare. By fulfilling your technically motivated desire to
automate repeating tasks, you did implement the wrong solution.

ICANN has the obligation to protect the Internet by maintaining stable and
secure provisioning of basic ressources. This is the main task ICANN has to
fulfill due by various contracts, especially the §3 of the Articles of
Incorporation as well as §3(b) of the Affirmation of Commitments.

Your paper draws the wrong solution, because it ignores this basic principle
and opens the road to rank indiviual interests higher than the public
interest in a single common Internet.

Given the political implications, your paper is a direct violation of §5(b)
and §5(c) of the Articles of Incorporation as well as §4 of the Affirmation
of Commitments.

Please let me quote from the legal document mentioned last:
  To ensure that its decisions are in the public interest, and not just the
  interests of a particular set of stakeholders, ICANN commits to perform
  and publish analyses of the positive and negative effects of its decisions
  on the public, including any financial impact on the public, and the
  positive or negative impact (if any) on the systemic security, stability
  and resiliency of the DNS. 

Your paper causes a strong impact to the creditability of ICANN.


More information about the At-Large mailing list