hi,

wow.  they also pull in the chestnut of global resolvability - directly counter to the arguments that each country be free to block what it wishes to block.  time for the Keep the Net Neutral movement to become active again?

It also is also caution against going ahead with .xxx as it has to apply to all pending and future.  What is pending now other than .xxx?







Can't wait to see what we do with that in the  SOAC MAPO group.

a.



On 6 Aug 2010, at 12:20, Robin Gross wrote:

> 
> http://gac.icann.org/system/files/GAC_on_MoPo_August_4_2010_0.pdf
> 
> GAC has spoken.  GAC sent a letter to ICANN Board this week:
> 
> "The GAC firmly believes that the absence of any controversial strings in the current universe of top-level domains (TLDs) to date contributes directly to the security and stability of the domain name and addressing system (DNS) and the universal resolvability of the system...."
> 
> So the governments claim there can be NO controversial tlds.  How enlightening!    And of course the old "security and stability" argument is trotted out to try to justify such an outrageous demand and curtailment of freedom.
> 
> Obviously this is not an issue of "security" of the Internet, but of trying to prevent people from being exposed to viewpoints that some govts don't like.   
> 
> Let's see if the Board turns a few cartwheels to please govts on this one.
> 
> Robin
> 
> 
> 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]
> 
> 
>