[At-Large] R: R: Is ICANN's oversight really moving away from the US government?

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Apr 9 04:39:54 UTC 2016

On Friday 08 April 2016 04:27 AM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
> snip

> Yes and they do, however if the registry operator is a US based entity
> then a US court can issue a court order to have the domains seized
> directly at the registry. It’s happened to clients of ours.

And for a gTLD, the registry is ICANN.... A similar order will be
directed to ICANN is a gLTD has to be siezed.
>     I do not deny there is an uneven playing field because ICANN is
>     more easily subject to US jurisdiction and law than the
>     jurisdictions and laws of other countries, but your arguments may
>     go too far.
> The issue around domain seizures has nothing to do with ICANN. Any
> domain seizure cases I’ve seen (including the examples cited by
> Parminder) were all made either at the registrar or registry level.
> I haven’t see any cases where ICANN has been involved directly (though
> they often get named in cases)

Because there havent been closed business specific gTLD till now, an
option that has been opened now.... Can you tell me, if a court finds a
foreign gTLD not to its taste or the concerned business offending the US
law what would it do, as it has been doing earlier with US registered
second level domain names.... Can you give me one reason or
justification why a court will consider ICANN any different from how it
has been considering US based registries in the past?

> If you want to avoid the reach of the US then you need to use:
>   * a non-US registry 
>   * A non-US registrar
>   * A non-US hosting provider
> Obviously if you want to go down that route you won’t be able to use
> .com or a lot of the other gTLDs, as even the ones that aren’t US
> owned are often using US based providers for their backend services.

So, you too agree/ accept that a non US business wanting to avoid
(illegitimate) extra- terrestrial application of US laws should not take
up gTLDs..... That is depressing.... Why should non US businesses be
denied an important global governance service? Does it mean nothing at
all to you, to ALAC?

BTW, to my friends in the US most vocal in this debate, may I ask a
question, that I have asked earlier but with a response - can you with
full honesty tell me, if India's laws were applicable on the global DNS
system in the same way as the US are now, and, for instance, taking a
gTLD would have exposed a US business to (illegitimate)
extra-territorial application of Indian laws, *would you have accepted it?*

Is there no fairness, equity and democracy left in the world....

And it of course pains me even more to see non US people here go along
with this extreme unfairness and injustice.


> Regards
> Michele
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> http://www.blacknight.host/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://ceo.hosting/
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
> Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20160409/2affa77d/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list