[log in to unmask]" type="cite"> 
-----Original Message-----
- How can we ensure that only the most serious crime is subject to this
rapid takedown process?
- How can we ensure free speech/freedom of expression websites are
exempt ("The policy should exclude suspension where issues of freedom of
expression are central aspects of the disputed issue," Nominet)?
- How can we ensure a very rapid appeal for when mistakes occur?
- How can we help the good faith domain name registrants know where to
go for help?

[Milton L Mueller] All very good questions, Kathy. 
On your second question, involving Nominet and the free expression exemption, is the quoted statement already embedded in the nominet policy, or is it language you are suggesting? I am sorry but I am not well-informed enough to know which one. 

--MM


Hi Milton,
The line I quoted is from Nominet's September Draft Recommendations.  There was a period of public comment through September, and now there is a quiet period as the recommendations and comments are evaluated. I have not seen a final version yet. I include the draft recommendation points below -- and the link to the full comment document.

On an additional note, throughout the process of meetings with law enforcement this year and last year, I (and others) spent a lot of time raising concerns about free speech and freedom of expression, and urging special caution when when speech is at issue. I see evidence of listening...

Below is a section of the Draft Recommendations -- and the full PDF can be found at http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/51980_Draft_Issue_Group_Recommendations_on_Domain_Names__Criminal_Activity.pdf

Best,
Kathy

------------------ Draft issue group recommendations on ‘Domain names used in connection with criminal activity’ ---------------------------

‘Domain names used in connection with criminal activity’ ‐ Draft Recommendations

Background

The issue group on ‘Domain names used in connection with criminal activity’ was set up in March 2011 to help bring external expertise and perspective into Nominet policy decision‐making.

The process has been open to all stakeholders throughout.

Having met 3 times, the group is now preparing to finalise recommendations to put forward to the Nominet board. The issue group will meet to discuss the draft recommendations on 21st September 2011, and feedback from all interested stakeholders is welcome.

This document outlines the key recommendations, based on areas of consensus developed to date within the group. The issue group’s recommendations will be presented to the Nominet board for its consideration.

It is anticipated that further discussion will take place under the policy process to consider issues where consensus has not yet been achieved.

Draft recommendations – key principles

  1. Nominet should have an abuse policy that specifically addresses criminal activity in its terms and conditions.

  2. Nominet should be able to act under an expedited process to suspend domain names associated with serious crime when requested by a law enforcement agency.

  3. An expedited procedure to suspend domain names should only be available where a) it is the last resort in dealing with the domain name, following requests with registrar, ISPs etc in the first instance or b) it is the most viable option to prevent imminent or ongoing serious consumer harm.

  4. The policy should exclude suspension where issues of freedom of expression are central aspects of the disputed issue.

  5. Nominet should consider establishing a registrant appeal mechanism.
  6. When the policy is operational, Nominet should set up an independent panel to review how the policy is workin

  7. Nominet should exclude civil or third party requests from this policy (which is focused on criminality), but these merit further discussion under the policy process.
  8. Nominet should communicate the outcome of its policy development to Government to inform its own deliberations in this field.

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">