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