Proposed NCUC/NCSG comment on the ICM Registry case

Joly MacFie joly at PUNKCAST.COM
Mon May 3 05:52:45 CEST 2010


"Shit or get off the pot" - looks good to me.



On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  Dear all:
>
> Robin asked me to do a first draft so here it is.
>
> Comments must be filed by May 10
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> The Noncommercial Users Constituency and Noncommercial Stakeholders Group
> (NCSG) represents nearly 200 nonprofit organizations, public interest
> advocacy groups, educators, researchers, philanthropic organizations and
> individuals.
>
>
>
> NCUC and NCSG believe that ICANN has a very simple choice to make in its
> handling of the .xxx domain.  The board can accept the fact that ICANN made
> serious mistakes in its handling of the matter and then make a good faith
> effort to rectify those mistakes – or it can refuse to do so. That is all
> there is to this decision. The complicated “process options” offered by the
> general counsel are distractions. Either ICANN accepts the determination of
> the independent review panel and creates the .xxx domain, or it doesn’t.
> Those are the only “options” of relevance to the community.
>
>
>
> Noncommercial users believe that the board should accept the decision of
> its independent review panel and prepare to add .xxx to the root. Anything
> less will raise serious doubts about ICANN’s accountability mechanisms and
> will undermine the legitimacy of the corporation and its processes. The
> contract offered to ICM Registry should be based on the same template as
> that offered to .mobi, .jobs and other contemporaneous applicants for
> sponsored TLDs.
>
>
>
> Noncommercial stakeholders are deeply interested in the outcome of the .xxx
> application for two reasons.
>
> 1)      As supporters of improved accountability for ICANN, we would be
> deeply concerned by a Board decision that ignored ICANN’s own Independent
> Review process. The IRP is one of ICANN’s few external accountability
> mechanisms. The .xxx case was the first test of that process. A group of
> distinguished and neutral panelists reviewed the record of this case in
> extensive detail, and decided against ICANN. It would be shocking if ICANN
> chose to ignore or circumvent the requirements of the IRP decision. An
> appeals process that has effect only when the board feels like complying is
> no accountability mechanism at all. We also feel that failure to comply with
> the IRP will encourage dispute settlement through litigation, which is not
> in the interests of ICANN or its community.
>
> 2)      As advocates of civil liberties and freedom of expression, we
> believe it is unacceptable for a TLD string to be rejected simply because
> some people or some governments object to it. ICANN must not become a tool
> of those who want to discourage or censor certain kinds of legal content. We
> believe that ICANN should not be turning its coordination of top level
> domain names into mechanisms of content regulation or censorship.
>
> To conclude, we ask the Board to look past the noise that will surely be
> generated by any public discussion that touches on pornography. This public
> comment period should not be a poll assessing the popularity of the .xxx
> domain. The board must focus exclusively on compliance with its own appeals
> process and strive to maintain ICANN’s integrity.
>
>
>
>
>
> Milton Mueller
> Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
> ------------------------------
> Internet Governance Project:
> http://internetgovernance.org
>
>
>



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100502/ee31f054/attachment.html>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list