[At-Large] Guidance for Domain Name Orders
Antony Van Couvering
avc at namesatwork.com
Wed Mar 14 20:36:16 UTC 2012
I don't think the way to deal with overreaching by government authorities (SOPA) is to propose even more government overreaching on a voluntary basis. Global seizure of domain names by the US (or any other) government is a bad idea, whether they fill in some forms from ICANN or not.
On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:59 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
> Well said Derek.
>
> My take is that ICANN inability of dealing intelligently with abuse, is leading us to problems like SOPA. This paper or on how to request take down, is a good step in the right direction.
>
> Now if we could have some global stats on these take downs. Most of the problem gets unoticed, because you would have to query every single registrar.
>
> Also the tunnel vision of people here is interesting. I said that just to start a flame war ;)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Derek Smythe" <derek at aa419.org>
> To: at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 14 March, 2012 11:35:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Guidance for Domain Name Orders
>
> On 3/14/2012 1:08 PM, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>> I think this ICANN paper oversteps the mark significantly.
>> Encouraging extra judicial, extra jurisdictional executive actions
> is highly destabilising as it interferes with local multi-stakeholder
> processes.
>>
>> ICANN is not in existence to replace localism with global control
> but to co-ordinate between local controls in regards the technical
> management of some of the Internet's unique resources.
>>
>> Yes there is a problem with DNS being a significant vector for bad
> actors as well as good ones. No the solution to deal with bad actors
> is not this.
>>
>>
>> Christian
>
> Or maybe not. Was the mark not overstepped long before that leads us
> to these steps, nothing more than a chance at damage control? Is the
> problem not junk in, junk out, devaluing the total system? Maybe we
> should take a step back and examine the whole process from domain
> registration, looking for potential abuse issues, right through to
> domain usage including abuse, and then we can have this chat.
>
> Expecting strict policies and procedures for take-downs is a bit too
> late for anonymous (due to fake whois details) unaccountable $10
> domains used for nefarious activities. Also while we are at it; free
> unverified privacy protection to hide fake whois details in many
> instances.
>
> You cannot expect a quality finished product without the appropriate
> feedback and corrective action to the start of the process.
>
> Incidentally, quite a good piece of detective work:
> http://www.legitscript.com/download/LegitScript_Report_on_Internet-bs_%28Large%29.pdf
>
>
> Derek
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large
mailing list