<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: new gtld objections based on morality and public order</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Dear Robin and all,<BR>
<BR>
I think that Susan’s fears are justifiable and it is good to see someone actually mentioning these issues. Morality and public order is very subjective and ICANN needs to realize that this proposal will once again generated the same problems of subjective interpretation that has happened during the drafting of the convention on Human Rights. These were different times of course however, currently we can not proceed as such without a clear examination of the issues that have to be dealt. Governments and in particular with their ccTLDs exercise a clear right of sovereignty and thus the whole plan instead of working as a catalyst for the unification of the DNS might actually have the diverse effect. At the consultation rounds for the IGF, China already expressed its problem over ICANN and the US and this plan might contribute towards reaching decisions that cannot be changed. I would be happy to work with someone towards promoting a more inclusive and subjective proposal.<BR>
<BR>
Konstantinos<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 03/03/2009 17:55, "Robin Gross" <<a href="robin@IPJUSTICE.ORG">robin@IPJUSTICE.ORG</a>> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>Susan Crawford's statement from the board below during the June meeting was very helpful in trying to come to a few narrow principles to guide new gtlds objections based on morality and public order. Let's craft a statement to help guide the board for the public forum this week.<BR>
<BR>
Any thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Robin<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> >>SUSAN CRAWFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> I have mixed feelings on this day. I have long supported the entry of new gTLDs into the root. It has seemed to me that it’s inappropriate for ICANN to use its monopoly position over giving advice about the existence of new TLDs to create artificial scarcity in TLDs, where there is no natural scarcity, in my view.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And that has led to a great deal of pent-up demand for the creation of new TLDs for various reasons, for communities, for new identities, all over the world.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And in particular, it is urgent that we create IDN gTLDs for the many language communities around the world that would prefer to have those.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> The question presented to the board today is a little strange.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> What we’re being asked to respond to is whether the recommendations, the policy recommendations from the GNSO are implementable. And then staff will go on, and if we decide they are, theoretically, implementable, will draft the implementation guidelines for the recommendations made by the GNSO council.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> There is a lot of important effort to go into those implementation details. And I am signing up to these recommendations on the condition that the implementation work will proceed as planned, and that the board and the community will have an opportunity to comment in detail on that implementation work.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> In particular, I want to applaud and underline what Wendy Seltzer just said about the morality and public order recommendation, recommendation number 6.<BR>
Way back when ICANN was formed, that original MOU, which we’re now talking about as the JPA, talked of transitioning the management of the Domain Name System to the private sector.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And the idea was to figure out whether the private sector had the capability and resources to assume the important responsibilities related to the technical management of the DNS. So that was the question.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And so the creation of ICANN, and the question before all of us, was whether this entity would be a good vessel for allowing the private sector to take the lead in the management of the Domain Name System.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And, in fact, the white paper in 1998 said that while international organizations may provide specific expertise or act as advisors to the new corporation, the U.S. continues to believe, as do most commenters, that neither national governments acting as sovereigns nor intergovernmental organizations acting as representatives of governments should participate in management of Internet names and addresses.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Of course, national governments now have, and will continue to have, authority to manage or establish policy for their own ccTLDs.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> This wasn’t done out of enthusiasm for the free market alone. The idea was also to avoid having sovereigns use the Domain Name System for their own content, control, desires. To avoid having the Domain Name System used as a choke point for content.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Recommendation 6, which is the morality and public order recommendation, represents quite a sea change in this approach, because the recommendation is that strings must not be contrary to generally acceptable legal norms relating to morality and public order that are recognized under international principles of law. That’s the language of the recommendation.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Now, if this is broadly implemented, this recommendation would allow for any government to effectively veto a string that made it uncomfortable.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Having a government veto strings is not allowing the private sector to lead. It’s allowing sovereigns to censor.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Particularly in the absence of straightforward clear limits on what morality and public order means, people will be unwilling to propose even controversial strings and we’ll end up with a plain vanilla list of TLDs.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> So I am unhappy about this recommendation. I am willing to vote for it on the strength of the board’s discussion and the staff’s undertakings that the standards for this recommendation will be narrowly stated.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And on my expectation that the board and the community will have an opportunity to review and approve, or not, the details of those standards.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> We do have some global norms of morality and public policy. They are very few. One of them is incitement to violent, lawless action. Nobody wants that around the world.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> A second might be incitement to or promotion of discrimination based on race, color, gender, ethnicity, religion, or national origin.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> And the third might be incitement to or promotion of child pornography or other sexual abuse of children.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> Otherwise, the question of morality and public order varies dramatically around the world. It’s a diverse, complicated world out there. And it may not be — it should not be possible to state that there is a single standard of morality and public order around the world.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="4"><FONT FACE="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:14pt'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'> So I am asking that staff come back with an express standard that’s constrained to stated norms, like the three I just listed, found and expressly in their national treaties. We need clear lines of adjudicatio<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="5"><FONT FACE="Courier, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18pt'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:11pt'>-- <BR>
Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,<BR>
Lecturer in Law,<BR>
GigaNet Membership Chair,<BR>
University of Strathclyde,<BR>
The Lord Hope Building,<BR>
141 St. James Road,<BR>
Glasgow, G4 0LT,<BR>
UK<BR>
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306<BR>
email: <a href="k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk">k.komaitis@strath.ac.uk</a> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>