law enforcers and icann

[Robin Gross]

I'd like to support Kathy and other's call for non-commercial users  
to join this important RAA working group and participate actively in  
its further development.

We need a team of people in this group - more than just 1 person - so  
please consider becoming involved in this RAA working group (and  
remind ICANN about the need to respect due process and other legal  
rights of registrants).

NCSG has a page set-up here for members to join who want to  
participate in this team.  This page hasn't been updated in awhile,  
but let's get some volunteers in the next week to join this  
discussion and update the materials.   We may have had some  
volunteers in Brussels to participate?

Thanks very much!

Best,
Robin


NCSG RAA Working Group Page:
http://ncdnhc.org/group/ 
gnsoregistraraccreditationagreementraaworkinggroup


On Jun 27, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Kathy Kleiman wrote:

> Hi Carlos and All,
> I attended the same session and had similar concerns to those of  
> Carlos. On the good side, for the first time in my recollection of  
> these discussions, law enforcement at least discussed and answered  
> questions about the importance of due process and data protection/ 
> privacy laws.
>
> on the downside, the road to registrars (and their RAA contract  
> changes) is being paved with a request for every sort of monitoring  
> and takedown request. Christine Jones, the respected General  
> Counsel of GoDaddy, complained bitterly about this in the Public  
> Forum.
>
> The other downside is that, in such an important Working Group,  
> there is no NCUC representative. I know there are too many things  
> going on, and too many important issues, but this one is central.  
> If you can put someone on the WG (which has much more work to go),  
> then NCUC's insights, understandings, and concerns for due process  
> and the limits of the scope and mission of ICANN will have a much  
> stronger voice than comments alone.
>
> Best,
> Kathy
>
>> I will be happy to try and help.
>>
>> fraternal regards
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> On 06/24/2010 07:28 AM, Alex Gakuru wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Wendy  
>>> Seltzer<wendy at seltzer.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Carlos,
>>>> We should include you in drafting public comments on the RAA  
>>>> report which
>>>> attached the law enforcement recommendations.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I second Carlos inclusion on the drafters team.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think at least some of the law enforcement representatives are  
>>>> concerned
>>>> about balance, and perhaps we can acknowledge their concerns while
>>>> recommending safeguards and due process requirements to oppose  
>>>> many of their
>>>> specific recommendations.
>>>
>>>
>>> Absolutely! On our comments, please call for privacy law enforcement
>>> representatives also?
>>>
>>> kindly,
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> --Wendy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 06/24/2010 06:06 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have just read the transcript of the panel "Law Enforcement
>>>>> Amendments to the RAA ", held on 21 June, 2010 during the  
>>>>> Brussels ICANN
>>>>> meeting. The panel was chaired by ALAC's Cheryl Langdon-Orr.  
>>>>> Everyone
>>>>> seemed to be sort of happy of sharing a discussion room full of  
>>>>> police :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not understand the role law enforcers are supposed to play in
>>>>> defining ICANN policies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Law enforcers such as the FBI, Interpol etc work on a very simple
>>>>> paradigm: they follow orders, and the more information they  
>>>>> get, the
>>>>> better to fulfill the orders they ought to follow. So they will  
>>>>> always
>>>>> defend the idea that all private data should be recorded and made
>>>>> available to them whenever they deem necessary. It simply makes  
>>>>> their
>>>>> job easier, and this is enough for them, and is all we will  
>>>>> hear from
>>>>> them, whatever the nice dressing of their discourses.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, ICANN should be looking for appropriate policies which  
>>>>> abide by
>>>>> internationally recognized human rights principles. This is the  
>>>>> realm of
>>>>> legislators, policy-makers, regulators -- not law enforcers --  
>>>>> and these
>>>>> are the organizations ICANN should be talking to in deciding  
>>>>> policies
>>>>> regarding balancing privacy rights with security.
>>>>>
>>>>> If decisions regarding the users' / consumers' rights to  
>>>>> privacy are
>>>>> going to be taken on the advice of the police, I do not think  
>>>>> we will
>>>>> arrive at a good end of this story.
>>>>>
>>>>> --c.a.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy at seltzer.org
>>>> Fellow, Silicon Flatirons Center at University of Colorado Law  
>>>> School
>>>> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet&  Society at Harvard University
>>>> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
>>>> http://www.chillingeffects.org/
>>>> https://www.torproject.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     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100628/80f6619f/attachment.html>