This seizing of domains makes it very relevant to know the location of
the registries' headquarters for new gTLDs. We already know that
US-based registries represent an obvious risk of arbitrary seizure, but
other countries are moving in a similar direction.

--c.a.

On 03/08/2012 01:52 AM, Joy Liddicoat wrote:
> Hi - I can't answer your question on Verisign, Adam, but on the wider issue
> of ICANN and public policy in relation to the root, it may be of interest
> that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights last week stressed the
> importance of the human rights impact assessment whenever the Internet
> policies were being deliberated: http://bit.ly/yW22hE
> Joy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam
> Peake
> Sent: Wednesday, 7 March 2012 8:01 p.m.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Fwd: [governance] Verisign seizes .com domain registered via
> foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities
> 
> Anyone know how many of the take-downs have used Verisign?
> 
> And wonder how many of the new TLD applicants have selected US-based
> technical providers.
> 
> During WSIS civil society frequently commented on US' unilateral control of
> the root as unacceptable.  Many submissions made, can only find this now...
> from 2005:
> 
> "We would like to underscore that unilateral control of the root zone file
> is a public policy issue. We agree with WGIG that in future no single
> government should have a pre-eminent role in global governance of the
> logical infrastructure of the Internet."
> 
> 
> Perhaps time to make it a public policy issue again?  With the AoC and other
> improvements the US has been pretty good since WSIS.  These name seizures
> are a nasty step back.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Nicolas Adam <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>> There is also this article [tech dirt] that is very interesting, that 
>> goes along the one that you referenced below [blog easyDNS] (and that 
>> is well worth highlighting a second time for this crowd).
>>
>> This goes straight to the heart of ICANN's legitimacy. It goes to who 
>> they cater to, who they don't oppose, to the limit of its autonomy, 
>> what perception of itself it conveys through its actions and inactions,
> etc.
>>
>> I don't pretend to have a ready diplomatic/political fix that ICANN 
>> can just roll-out as a guide going forward. But it seems to me that 
>> its political choices, prudent and wise as they may seem to the ones 
>> in charge (or the ones preparing Dan's one-pagers), are unfortunately 
>> the hallmark of a lack of identity and the signs of a sure downfall.
>>
>> No new type of political body like ICANN can survive without making its
> bed.
>> Somehow, somewhere. How it manages itself now, marvelously 
>> noncommittally, only serves at alienating stakeholders that could 
>> otherwise turn out to support it. And it never gets anything to show 
>> for it from the ones that it punctually accommodate.
>>
>> I see this as a very important Board-level long term issue, that needs 
>> strong leadership and attention. The users (writ large) will not 
>> tolerate ICANN if it cannot provide consistency and predictability, 
>> that is, an identity.
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>> On 3/1/2012 8:17 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>> Is this new, or just more of what ICE has been doing before.  I don't 
>> remember if Verisign's been used in this way before.  Clip from the 
>> blog post (link below)
>>
>> "We all know that with some US-based Registrars (*cough* Godaddy 
>> *cough*), all it takes is a badge out of a box of crackerjacks and you 
>> have the authority to fax in a takedown request which has a good shot 
>> at being honoured. We also know that some non-US registrars, it takes 
>> a lot more "due process-iness" to get a domain taken down.
>>
>> But now, none of that matters, because in this case the State of 
>> Maryland simply issued a warrant to .com operator Verisign, (who is 
>> headquartered in California) who then duly updated the rootzone for 
>> .com with two new NS records for bodog.com which now redirect the 
>> domain to the takedown page."
>>
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: michael gurstein <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:47 PM
>> Subject: [governance] Verisign seizes .com domain registered via 
>> foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>> http://blog2.easydns.org/2012/02/29/verisign-seizes-com-domain-registe
>> red-vi a-foreign-registrar-on-behalf-of-us-authorities/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     [log in to unmask]
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>