I'm also concerned about COICA (see <http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2010/09/21/copyright-censorship-and-domain-name-blacklists-at-home-in-the-us.html>), but I'm wary of doing something from ICANN-space. ICANN declined to participate in DC discussions of "voluntary" domain censorship measures last week, and I think that's the right stance -- it's outside ICANN's scope to address the *use* of domain names. I think we could submit joint comments as individuals whose knowledge and experience comes in part from participation in ICANN activities. --Wendy On 10/03/2010 09:21 AM, Brenden Kuerbis wrote: > Thanks Bill, I'd like to help on this. And I agree working with ALAC, and > particularly Marc Rotenburg, would be a good idea. > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 5:11 AM, William Drake < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Thanks Kathy and Rafik for the updates. Good to know the bill won't be >> taken up until after the midterm elections, but troubling that the WH is >> nevertheless pushing forward with the notion of using the DNS to censor at >> the behest of intellectual property interests. At least ICANN had the good >> sense not to get involved in the latter discussion, >> http://domainincite.com/icann-will-not-attend-white-house-drugs-meeting/ >> >> When the Senate swings back to consider COICA, I would still favor us >> writing a letter, perhaps in conjunction with ALAC. I'd be happy to work on >> a draft, perhaps after Cartagena and before the holiday season. If anyone >> would be interested in collaborating on this just send me a note for future >> reference. >> >> Best, >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 2, 2010, at 1:47 AM, Rafik Dammak wrote: >> >> hi Bill, >> >> for contracted parties, they have pressure from US gov and even had meeting >> at White house this week I think >> >> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml >> >> >> <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100929/20293711230/even-without-coica-white-house-asking-registrars-to-voluntarily-censor-infringing-sites.shtml> >> Regards >> >> Rafik >> >> 2010/9/30 William Drake <[log in to unmask]> >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Maybe this is something on which NCSG, ALAC, and others in ICANNland >>> should weigh in on, e.g. with a letter to Leahy? It would certainly seem to >>> fall within our bailiwick... >>> >>> Have yet to hear anything from the contracted parties, will be interesting >>> to see how they play it… >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> *From: *William Drake <[log in to unmask]> >>> *Date: *September 30, 2010 9:54:54 AM GMT+02:00 >>> *To: *[log in to unmask], "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < >>> [log in to unmask]> >>> *Subject: **COICA* >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> COICA is an intergalactically horrible idea that seems designed to greatly >>> escalate concerns about unilateralism vis. CIR. As CDT's letter >>> http://cdt.org/files/pdfs/Leahy_bill_memo.pdf notes, >>> >>> "S. 3804 significantly aggravates the situation by suggesting to the world >>> that the U.S. does intend to use the historic nature of the DNS (with >>> American companies administering “.com” and other leading top-level domains) >>> to impose American law on the global Internet. Under the bill, the U.S. >>> asserts that it can take down websites created and operated anywhere in the >>> world, simply based on the fact that the websites use the most popular >>> global top-level domain (.com). This type of assertion of global control is >>> the kind of U.S. exercise of power about which other countries of the world >>> have worried – and about which U.S. foreign policy has sought to reassure >>> the world. Thus S. 3804 directly harms the United Statesʼ Internet >>> governance agenda pursued through diplomatic channels over the past ten >>> years." >>> >>> A bit astonishing and sad that the bill was introduced by Patrick Leahy, >>> who for many years has been a champion of online civil liberties and partner >>> of US public interest groups on digital matters. But the IPR lobby is a >>> powerful beast that apparently must be placated…Still, I'd like to think >>> he's going through the motions here and knows this should fail. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Sep 30, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote: >>> >>> >>> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/09/open-letter >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> >>> [log in to unmask] >>> >>> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >>> >>> [log in to unmask] >>> >>> >>> For all list information and functions, see: >>> >>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance >>> >>> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>> >>> >>> *********************************************************** >>> William J. Drake >>> Senior Associate >>> Centre for International Governance >>> Graduate Institute of International and >>> Development Studies >>> Geneva, Switzerland >>> [log in to unmask] >>> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html >>> www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake >>> *********************************************************** >>> >>> >> > -- Wendy Seltzer -- [log in to unmask] +1 914-374-0613 Fellow, Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/