I'm also concerned about COICA (see
<http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2010/09/21/copyright-censorship-and-domain-name-blacklists-at-home-in-the-us.html>),
but I'm wary of doing something from ICANN-space.
ICANN declined to participate in DC discussions of "voluntary" domain
censorship measures last week, and I think that's the right stance --
it's outside ICANN's scope to address the *use* of domain names. I
think we could submit joint comments as individuals whose knowledge and
experience comes in part from participation in ICANN activities.
--Wendy
On 10/03/2010 09:21 AM, Brenden Kuerbis wrote:
> Thanks Bill, I'd like to help on this. And I agree working with ALAC, and
> particularly Marc Rotenburg, would be a good idea.
>
> On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 5:11 AM, William Drake <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Thanks Kathy and Rafik for the updates. Good to know the bill won't be
>> taken up until after the midterm elections, but troubling that the WH is
>> nevertheless pushing forward with the notion of using the DNS to censor at
>> the behest of intellectual property interests. At least ICANN had the good
>> sense not to get involved in the latter discussion,
>> http://domainincite.com/icann-will-not-attend-white-house-drugs-meeting/
>>
>> When the Senate swings back to consider COICA, I would still favor us
>> writing a letter, perhaps in conjunction with ALAC. I'd be happy to work on
>> a draft, perhaps after Cartagena and before the holiday season. If anyone
>> would be interested in collaborating on this just send me a note for future
>> reference.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> On Oct 2, 2010, at 1:47 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>>
>> hi Bill,
>>
>> for contracted parties, they have pressure from US gov and even had meeting
>> at White house this week I think
>>
>> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml
>>
>>
>> <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml>
>> Regards
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2010/9/30 William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Maybe this is something on which NCSG, ALAC, and others in ICANNland
>>> should weigh in on, e.g. with a letter to Leahy? It would certainly seem to
>>> fall within our bailiwick...
>>>
>>> Have yet to hear anything from the contracted parties, will be interesting
>>> to see how they play it…
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>> *From: *William Drake <[log in to unmask]>
>>> *Date: *September 30, 2010 9:54:54 AM GMT+02:00
>>> *To: *[log in to unmask], "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
>>> [log in to unmask]>
>>> *Subject: **COICA*
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> COICA is an intergalactically horrible idea that seems designed to greatly
>>> escalate concerns about unilateralism vis. CIR. As CDT's letter
>>> http://cdt.org/files/pdfs/Leahy_bill_memo.pdf notes,
>>>
>>> "S. 3804 significantly aggravates the situation by suggesting to the world
>>> that the U.S. does intend to use the historic nature of the DNS (with
>>> American companies administering “.com” and other leading top-level domains)
>>> to impose American law on the global Internet. Under the bill, the U.S.
>>> asserts that it can take down websites created and operated anywhere in the
>>> world, simply based on the fact that the websites use the most popular
>>> global top-level domain (.com). This type of assertion of global control is
>>> the kind of U.S. exercise of power about which other countries of the world
>>> have worried – and about which U.S. foreign policy has sought to reassure
>>> the world. Thus S. 3804 directly harms the United Statesʼ Internet
>>> governance agenda pursued through diplomatic channels over the past ten
>>> years."
>>>
>>> A bit astonishing and sad that the bill was introduced by Patrick Leahy,
>>> who for many years has been a champion of online civil liberties and partner
>>> of US public interest groups on digital matters. But the IPR lobby is a
>>> powerful beast that apparently must be placated…Still, I'd like to think
>>> he's going through the motions here and knows this should fail.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 30, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>> For all list information and functions, see:
>>>
>>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>>
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>
>>>
>>> ***********************************************************
>>> William J. Drake
>>> Senior Associate
>>> Centre for International Governance
>>> Graduate Institute of International and
>>> Development Studies
>>> Geneva, Switzerland
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake
>>> ***********************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask] +1 914-374-0613
Fellow, Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/
https://www.torproject.org/
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/
|
