Carlos:

>>> Carlos Afonso <[log in to unmask]> 12/01/03 08:08AM >>>
>It looks like an extremely serious situation regarding violation 
>of freedom of information and the right to communicate.
>What are the options for us to act on this?

Thanks for passing on this information. The tough question
for ICANN is the degree to which a basic infrastructure 
coordination and assignment body can or should exert pressure
to preserve values such as freedom of information. 

We are constantly told by ICANN management that it has
no such policy role. However, we all know that this is a lie 
because ICANN's contracts and policies have been 
profoundly influenced by demands to protect trademark 
rights, which is a policy issue equivalent to freedom of
expression and right to communicate. 

The difference, of course, is that trademark and business
owners are more powerful in the ICANN context than
civil liberties advocates. So my belief is that these civil
liberties concerns need to be strengthened within ICANN
via such organizations as NCUC and the ALAC.

Thus, I would also like to encourage RSF and APC to 
join NCUC. 

You could try to introduce some kind
of resolution in GNSO Council regarding this. Of course,
because it involves country codes rather than GTLDs
some people will object. Another option is for NCUC to
prepare a statement that could be transmitted to the 
ICANN Board. We could simply express concern and ask
IANA to take civil liberties concerns into account in any
redelegation process. 

--MM