Hi Avri,
as I new member, so maybe I didn't get an agreement between NCSG members.
Regarding to the Recommendation 6 Community Working Group, are you sure
that NCSG support all ALAC's recommendation, including points:
1. "Completely eliminate the term "morality and public order"? So it's
mean NCSG possibility to support .XXX? can you share what is you or NCSG
justification to support this recommendation?
2."Deny national law as a sole criteria for objections based on these
criteria".I red your opinion that ICANN should only accept international
law as consideration. My question is Which international law? who are in
charge to make international law? and how if there is no international law
that regulate internet, or domain name matters?
On the other hand, NCSG will support ALAC'S recommendation that stated
"Require individual government objections to be made either through the
Community Objections Process or through one of the ALAC and the GAC"
I think this point is INCONSISTENT with both of recommendations above. As
I know GAC is consists of Government representative of countries who have
made engagement with ICANN. So, the Morality and Public order(MOPO)is
reflection of individual government objection that sent through GAC.
Besides, we can't support the ALAC's recommendation to deny national law,
because law made by country who have sovereignty, means that sovereignty
acknowledge by international constitution. Indeed, when law have signed
and have declared to be applied, It is mean that law have approved by all
parties in country, which are people and government. So, please don't to
be easy to say your supporting for this recommendation.
So, my opinion to members of NCSG, please WE HAVE TO ANALYZE deeply one by
one of all ALAC's recommendations.Even, we have to have a reason or
justification why we support that recommendation point by point.
My regards,
Dwi Elfrida
Hi there,
>
> I've made a few suggested edits in the attached version. Just fleshed-out
> more on the issue of the Independent Objector and clarified that our
> support for the ALAC statement was support for the concerns raised by
> ALAC. (As I recall, we diverged on the conclusion: ALAC said "don't go
> forward" and we said "fix it and go forward")
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/5gtld-guide/msg00099.html
>
> Thanks,
> Robin
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2011, at 11:44 AM, Konstantinos Komaitis wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Please see the email from Mary below regarding Recommendation 6 -
>> Morality and Public order objections.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> KK
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,
>> Lecturer in Law,
>> NCUC Chair,
>> University of Strathclyde,
>> The Lord Hope Building,
>> 141 St. James Road,
>> Glasgow, G4 0LT,
>> UK
>> tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +44 (0)141 548
4306 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +44 (0)141 548
4306 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
>> email: [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.komaitis.org
>> Book: http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415477765/
>>
>> ------ Forwarded Message
>> From: Konstantinos Komaitis <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:35:32 +0000
>> To: Mary Wong <[log in to unmask]>, <[log in to unmask]>,
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>> Conversation: [ncsg-policy] Draft NCSG comments to GNSO Council on Rec 6
>> Subject: Re: [ncsg-policy] Draft NCSG comments to GNSO Council on Rec 6
>>
>>
>> Dear Mary,
>>
>> Thank you very much for taking the lead in drafting this statement. I
>> have added a small bit on the 'incitement and instigation' section,
>> seeking to clarify the importance of raising the bar of such objections.
>> I am attaching the amended version and I fully support this statement.
>>
>> Again thank you very much for drafting this.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> KK
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/01/2011 18:56, "Mary Wong" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> As you may recall, NCSG members participated actively in the
>> cross-community working group (CWG) that made certain recommendations
>> regarding what was formerly termed the "morality & public order"
>> objection process. At the Cartagena meeting, the ICANN Board and the
>> GNSO Council requested further clarity and comment from the CWG and each
>> Stakeholder Group (SG), respectively.
>>
>> The CWG has since submitted its response to the Board, and the Council
>> is due to consider comments from SGs shortly. As such, attached is a
>> rough attempt at providing the Council with the requested input.
>>
>> I apologize for the short notice, but as the next Council meeting is
>> scheduled for 13 January, I'd appreciate any major changes or
>> indications of non-support be sent to the list as soon as possible, e.g.
>> within the next 24 hours.
>>
>> Thanks and cheers
>> Mary
>>
>>
>> Mary W S Wong
>> Professor of Law
>> Chair, Graduate IP Programs
>> UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SCHOOL OF LAW Two White Street Concord, NH
>> 03301 USA Email: [log in to unmask] Phone: 1-603-513-5143 Webpage:
>> http://www.law.unh.edu/marywong/index.php Selected writings available on
>> the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at:
>> http://ssrn.com/author=437584
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> As of August 30, 2010, Franklin Pierce Law Center has affiliated with
>> the University of New Hampshire and is now known as the University of
>> New Hampshire School of Law. Please note that all email addresses have
>> changed and now follow the convention: [log in to unmask]
>> For more information on the University of New Hampshire School of Law,
>> please visit law.unh.edu <http://law.unh.edu>
>>
>>
>> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>> <NCSG COMMENTS TO THE GNSO COUNCIL ON THE RECOMMENDATION 6 CROSS.DOCX>
>
>
>
>
> IP JUSTICE
> Robin Gross, Executive Director
> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
|
