Does anyone have a link to an analysis/statement of (from Avri's email:)
[not bar TLDs based on sensitivities unless they reach the] "threshold of
defined objections."

Can you suggest a good reference for information/analysis on defining the
separation of 'freedom of expression' from 'sensitivities'?

Gracias,
Ginger

Ginger (Virginia) Paque

[log in to unmask]
Diplo Foundation
Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme
www.diplomacy.edu/ig
**
**



On 15 August 2012 11:57, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  This might be a good time to remind the board that one of GNSO's
> recommendations was the principle that the process not infringe freedom of
> expression rights.  That was something NCUC fought for and got in the final
> gnso recommendations, but has been long forgotten by staff (and the
> community) in the implementation of these recommendations.
>
> Robin
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The whole notion of sensitivities came it, if I remember correctly,
> because no one wanted to accept the notion of National Law objections, thus
> they were renamed sensitivities.
>
> Freedom of expression allows for all to comment on their own and the
> sensitivities of others.  what is critical is that the Board not bar TLDs
> based on sensitivities unless they reach the threshold of defined
> objections.
>
> But government sensitivities may be the first indicators of requests for
> GAC warnings and advice.  So they are important indicators and calls to
> action.
>
> avri
>
> On 15 Aug 2012, at 14:47, Mark Leiser wrote:
>
> To me, this only reaffirms Professor Mueller's statement about objecting
> to sensitivities. If every country objected (and won the argument) based on
> a sensitivity issue...
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Mark Leiser
>
>
> 145 Kilmarnock Road
> Suite 612
> Glasgow G41 3JA
> Tel: +44 (0)845 299-7248
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/markleiser
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/mleiser
> Fax: +44 0141-404-2633
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Marc Perkel <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> What if Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines wanted .virgin? That would
> actually make sense.
>
> http://www.virgin.com/company
>
>
> On 8/14/2012 9:38 PM, Horacio T. Cadiz wrote:
>   We've been discussing new gTLDs and HR. Milton objected to the
> statement:  "Consideration of applications for new TLDs should be
> mindful of sensitivities."
>
>   KSA objects to .virgin, .baby, and others
>
>
> http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/0/14/icann.receives.registration.complaints.on.moral.health.grounds/
>
>
>
>    The sensitivities of the KSA have been aroused.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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]
>
>
>
>