<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Evan, I’d appreciate it if you’d forward this message to the relevant ALAC list.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p>We have absolutely no sympathy for the IOC or its franchisees, or IGOs in general (that already have the elite ability to register in dot-int). But while we don't want to make any specific exemptions for the Red Cross, we feel there is a legitimate discussion
to be had about attempts to spoof charities. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] But Evan, we have been having that discussion, for years. And it is not just charities that get spoofed, but anyone.
</span></i></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p>There, are, unfortunately, real instances of domains created to deliberately confuse potential donors (especially domains quickly created in the aftermath of disasters), often by in part appropriating the names of known charities such as the Red Cross.<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] Of course this is true, any everyone knows it. But that is a second-level domain name problem. So can ALAC at least have the gumption to clearly come out and
state that there is no problem whatsoever at the top level? This whole business of quickly jumping on disasters only works when quick deceptive actions can be taken in the wake of a disaster, and that can’t happen with TLDs.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Remember, the IRC tried to hold up the entire new gTLD program based on its experiences with some spoofing at the second level.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Moreover, most of the spoofing was based on the CONTENT of the emails, more than on the domain name. No scientific studies have been done, but tons and tons of fraudulent charity
pitches are sent out each year, and most of them do not rely on domain name confusion, or domains are ancillary to the scam. Here is one of many examples:
<a href="http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/05/man_suspected_of_running_bogus.html">
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/05/man_suspected_of_running_bogus.html</a>
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Do you think that, due to this incident, there should be a central authority who decides who gets to use the word “veteran” in any context, anywhere in the US or the world? No?
Then think again about the idea that you can put a serious dent in charity spoofing by carving out special rights for IRC and IOC and others<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p>There are many in At-Large who believe that the domain system has some responsibility to prevent such clear instances of abuse, which has the potential to expand significantly upon expansion of the TLD namespace.<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] Then there are many in the At-Large who are extremely naïve about the dangers – and frequent ineffectiveness – of attempts to “engineer” policy into a system.
We have been having this same discussion since 1996, fer chrissake. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">I am not even buying the idea that the risk increases with the number of new TLDs. How, exactly? Will someone who registers redcross.sucks or redcross.google be likely to do this?
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p> What is less clear is how to do this, but simply doing nothing does not appear to be a reasonable option.
<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] Unless you can propose a very specific way to engineer domain name assignments to prevent all such abuse, and unless we can judge that method’s cost-benefit ratio
or impact on free expression rights, you have no business criticizing “doing nothing.” <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p>This is more of a 2LD issue than a TLD one, <span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] uh, yes.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p>We would prefer to generalize it, since charities besides the Red Cross suffer from this kind of fraud.<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] That makes it 1000 times worse. Another demonstration of the utter naivete of this position. So now you have not only the policy problem of pre-empting millions
of possible registrations at the second level, you compound it with the problem of distinguishing between which organizations will and will not get the special protections – a distinction that will give you hell, I guarantee it.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p>And we prefer to approach this from the PoV of safeguarding the trust and needs of donors and supporters as opposed to trademark and trademark-like "rights". However, a complete response of "do nothing, everything's OK" may indicate an ICANN that is insensitive
to the public consequences of its policies, and indeed a mis-functioning (or at least imbalanced) MSM.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">[Milton L Mueller] Right, ICANN hasn’t given enough attention to trademark rights??!!! Did ALAC fall asleep 15 years ago and just wake up?</span></i></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>