This seizing of domains makes it very relevant to know the location of the registries' headquarters for new gTLDs. We already know that US-based registries represent an obvious risk of arbitrary seizure, but other countries are moving in a similar direction. --c.a. On 03/08/2012 01:52 AM, Joy Liddicoat wrote: > Hi - I can't answer your question on Verisign, Adam, but on the wider issue > of ICANN and public policy in relation to the root, it may be of interest > that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights last week stressed the > importance of the human rights impact assessment whenever the Internet > policies were being deliberated: http://bit.ly/yW22hE > Joy > > -----Original Message----- > From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam > Peake > Sent: Wednesday, 7 March 2012 8:01 p.m. > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Fwd: [governance] Verisign seizes .com domain registered via > foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities > > Anyone know how many of the take-downs have used Verisign? > > And wonder how many of the new TLD applicants have selected US-based > technical providers. > > During WSIS civil society frequently commented on US' unilateral control of > the root as unacceptable. Many submissions made, can only find this now... > from 2005: > > "We would like to underscore that unilateral control of the root zone file > is a public policy issue. We agree with WGIG that in future no single > government should have a pre-eminent role in global governance of the > logical infrastructure of the Internet." > > > Perhaps time to make it a public policy issue again? With the AoC and other > improvements the US has been pretty good since WSIS. These name seizures > are a nasty step back. > > Adam > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Nicolas Adam <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: >> There is also this article [tech dirt] that is very interesting, that >> goes along the one that you referenced below [blog easyDNS] (and that >> is well worth highlighting a second time for this crowd). >> >> This goes straight to the heart of ICANN's legitimacy. It goes to who >> they cater to, who they don't oppose, to the limit of its autonomy, >> what perception of itself it conveys through its actions and inactions, > etc. >> >> I don't pretend to have a ready diplomatic/political fix that ICANN >> can just roll-out as a guide going forward. But it seems to me that >> its political choices, prudent and wise as they may seem to the ones >> in charge (or the ones preparing Dan's one-pagers), are unfortunately >> the hallmark of a lack of identity and the signs of a sure downfall. >> >> No new type of political body like ICANN can survive without making its > bed. >> Somehow, somewhere. How it manages itself now, marvelously >> noncommittally, only serves at alienating stakeholders that could >> otherwise turn out to support it. And it never gets anything to show >> for it from the ones that it punctually accommodate. >> >> I see this as a very important Board-level long term issue, that needs >> strong leadership and attention. The users (writ large) will not >> tolerate ICANN if it cannot provide consistency and predictability, >> that is, an identity. >> >> Nicolas >> >> >> On 3/1/2012 8:17 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> Is this new, or just more of what ICE has been doing before. I don't >> remember if Verisign's been used in this way before. Clip from the >> blog post (link below) >> >> "We all know that with some US-based Registrars (*cough* Godaddy >> *cough*), all it takes is a badge out of a box of crackerjacks and you >> have the authority to fax in a takedown request which has a good shot >> at being honoured. We also know that some non-US registrars, it takes >> a lot more "due process-iness" to get a domain taken down. >> >> But now, none of that matters, because in this case the State of >> Maryland simply issued a warrant to .com operator Verisign, (who is >> headquartered in California) who then duly updated the rootzone for >> .com with two new NS records for bodog.com which now redirect the >> domain to the takedown page." >> >> >> Adam >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: michael gurstein <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:47 PM >> Subject: [governance] Verisign seizes .com domain registered via >> foreign Registrar on behalf of US Authorities >> To: [log in to unmask] >> >> >> http://blog2.easydns.org/2012/02/29/verisign-seizes-com-domain-registe >> red-vi a-foreign-registrar-on-behalf-of-us-authorities/ >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> [log in to unmask] >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >