Why complained earlier on expectations that cash strapped ccTLDs especially in Africa/developing cannot afford parallel servers, databases and time costs to enforce third parties IP/copyrights/trademark etc interests. It somehow 'feels' safer NOT to register a .com now? On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > The latest info that I've seen is that Verisign assigned new DNS servers > at the Registry level, and then locked the domain so that even the Registrar > can't update it. So now it looks like it may have been VeriSign who > "seized" them. No word on ICANN's role in this situation, if any. > > > > On Nov 26, 2010, at 8:29 PM, Marc Perkel wrote: > > So was it ICANN that actually did the seizing? > > On 11/26/2010 7:25 PM, Michael Haffely wrote: > > The concerning part about the report from today is that the domain owner > never received any complaint or due process before the domains were seized. > It appears that no Cease and Desist, warrant, suit, or other criminal > complaint was brought up before the domain was taken. What if (for an > example) this behavior is taken up by the Patent and Copyright "trolls". > What happens to an individual/nonprofit/organization when they have their > domain yanked out from under them? > > If ICANN is to seize domains from their rightful owners by demand of a law > enforcement agency we need to have a clear, *rapid* appeals process to > prevent abuse by corporations, law enforcement agencies, and governments. > > > -Mike H. > > > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Andrew A. Adams <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Very similar moves are happening in the UK, with Nominet (UK non-profit >> with >> the .uk (and .gb) country-code delegation) engaging with the UK's SOCA >> (Serious and Organised Crime Agency *) to remove 1200 "sites engaged in >> selling counterfeit goods" recently and now doing a more explicit deal >> with >> the police to take down the DNS registration for sites "alleged to be >> involved in criminal activity". >> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/25/nominet_crime/ >> >> (*) The SOCA is a rather dodgy organisation, IMHO. When it was set up the >> then home secrewtary made a big thing of it not being actually police and >> therefore not bound by the requirements that the police have to respect >> the >> human rights of citizens. THat's a recipe for a secret police operating >> extra-judicially and here we see exactly that kind of approach. >> >> I am very worried by these kinds of moves. Zittrain's "The Future of the >> Internet" and Mueller's "Networks and States" concerns about censorship >> becoming the norm not the exception online seem to be coming true. While >> I'm >> not in favour of criminals having free reign, the trouble is that all the >> hard won freedoms such as due process, balance of rights, etc. seem to be >> being thrown out in the digital domain. >> >> >> >> -- >> Professor Andrew A Adams [log in to unmask] >> Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and >> Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics >> Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/ >> > > > > > > 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] > > > > -- regards, Alex Gakuru http://www.mwenyeji.com Hosting, surprise yourself!