Thx for this Robin. Nicolas On 3/31/2011 6:01 PM, Robin Gross wrote: > FYI: IP Justice statement on NTIA request for comments on IANA - ICANN. > > Begin forwarded message: > >> *From: *Robin Gross <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> *Date: *March 31, 2011 2:59:34 PM PDT >> *To: *[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> *Cc: *Robin Gross <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> *Subject: **ICANN’s Responsibility to Respect International Human >> Rights Principles - [Docket No. 110207099-1099-01 /// RIN 0660-XA23]* >> >> Please see attached Word file (and text below) comments from IP Justice >> >> RE:Docket No. 110207099-1099-01 >> >> RIN 0660-XA23 >> >> Request for comments on the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority >> (IANA) Functions >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________________________________ >> >> United States Department of Commerce >> >> National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) >> >> RE:Docket No. 110207099-1099-01 >> >> RIN 0660-XA23 >> >> Request for comments on the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority >> (IANA) Functions >> >> 31 March 2011 >> >> Fiona M. Alexander >> >> Associate Administrator >> >> Office of International Affairs >> >> National Telecommunications and Information Administration >> >> U.S. Department of Commerce >> >> 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Room 4701 >> >> Washington, DC 20230 >> >> Via email to:[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> >> *ICANN’s Responsibility to Respect International Human Rights Principles* >> >> IP Justice[1] <x-msg://255/#_ftn1> appreciates this opportunity to >> provide comment to US Department of Commerce National >> Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) regarding >> improvements to the functions of the Internet Assigned Numbers >> Authority (IANA) and its relationship with the Internet Corporation >> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). >> >> IP Justice would like to focus NTIA’s attention on one issue >> fundamental to all of ICANN’s responsibility -- one that impacts all >> of ICANN’s functions: ICANN’s obligation to respect internationally >> recognized human rights principles in carrying out its duties. >> With power, comes responsibility.As the organization responsible for >> the global governance of certain functions of the Domain Name Space >> (DNS), ICANN must also be willing to live up to the same high >> standards as other legitimate governance organizations in respecting >> the fundamental rights of Internet users.Until a suitable legal >> framework is in the place that can hold ICANN accountable for >> circumventing internationally recognized human rights guarantees, >> ICANN is in no position to receive additional autonomy. >> As a private corporation, there is very little to hold ICANN in >> compliance with international legal standards and human rights >> protections that nation states must respect.As a private corporation >> ICANN does not believe it owes any legal duty or ethical obligation >> to respect internationally recognized legal principles.Some contend >> that the legal structure of ICANN as a private corporation serves as >> a legal “loop hole” through which the organization can escape any >> responsibility to uphold human rights in the space where it governs. >> ICANN’s connection to the United Stated Government through its >> contractual arrangement with NTIA is one of the few ways that ICANN >> can be held accountable to upholding fundamental rights and >> freedoms.The US Government is legally obligated to respect human >> rights, while private corporations are not.ICANN has provided mixed >> messages about the extent to which it owes an obligation to uphold >> international legal principles including human rights. >> Legitimate governance organizations are rooted in legal traditions >> that respect human rights and have means of enforcing them.For >> example, the US Government is prohibited from restricting the speech >> of its citizens except in narrowly defined circumstances under the >> First Amendment to the US Constitution.Furthermore the US (and most >> governments that participate at ICANN) have signed the Universal >> Declaration of Human Rights, including Article 19, which “guarantees >> everyone the right to freedom of expression in any medium and >> regardless of frontiers”.Unfortunately ICANN remains unwilling to >> commit to human rights principles, preferring to remain without any >> legal duty or ethical obligation to ensure the public’s most >> fundamental rights are protected in the critical realm over which it >> claims authority. >> ICANN must affirmatively answer that it will uphold internationally >> recognized human rights, but to date ICANN has flouted any obligation >> to protect the public in this manner.At the Rome ICANN Meeting in >> 2004, a European Union Privacy Commissioner said that ICANN’s “whois” >> policies violate international privacy protections.ICANN has done >> nothing to rectify this deficiency of privacy protections in its >> policies. >> ICANN sees no duty to protect freedom of expression in the DNS >> either.Proposed policies for new top-level domains that would >> prohibit “sensitive” words as domain names are in stark contrast to >> internationally recognized freedom of expression >> guarantees.Internationally recognized legal principles of “due >> process” which ensure fairness can also be easily skirted in a >> private corporation that believes it owes no duty to the public. >> Unfortunately ICANN’s lack of commitment to internationally >> recognized fundamental rights and freedoms threatens the healthy >> growth of the DNS and the global public interest.ICANN’s structure >> must be rooted in a firm foundation and a legally enforceable >> obligation to uphold basic rights.Today more than ever, we see the >> promise and the power of a free and open Internet to empower citizens >> and strengthen democracies.And we recognize the critical need to >> ensure the Internet remains an engine of human progress and >> freedom.Respect for human rights in the policies governing the DNS is >> critical to furthering the global public interest. >> Since ICANN claims its objective is to promote the global public >> interest, it ought to be willing to adhere to internationally >> recognized legal principles that guarantee the public basic rights >> and fundamental freedoms.Removing any duty or legal obligation to >> respect human rights, which ICANN may have by virtue of its >> relationship with the US Government, would leave the public >> defenseless in cyberspace. >> Without a legal mechanism to ensure ICANN will respect >> internationally recognized human rights, the same way a legitimate >> governance organization must respect human rights, it would be >> dangerous to grant ICANN further autonomy. >> Respectfully submitted, >> Robin Gross >> IP Justice >> http://www.ipjustice.org <http://www.ipjustice.org/> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> [1] <x-msg://255/#_ftnref1> IP Justice is an international civil >> liberties organization that promotes balanced intellectual property >> rights and freedom of expression on the Internet >> http://www.ipjustice.org <http://www.ipjustice.org/>.IP Justice is a >> member of ICANN’s Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) >> http://ncdnhc.org <http://ncdnhc.org/>. >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 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 <http://www.ipjustice.org/> e: >> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> >> >> > > > > > 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] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > >